You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently we assign a nullifier counter to a pending note hash. If this value is not zero, it means the note hash is nullified in the same tx by the nullifier with that specific counter.
We use this counter to check that, when reading a pending note, the read request is emitted before the note hash's nullified.
Although this check makes sense, it doesn't align with how reading a settled note hash works. A read request for a settled note hash is valid as long as the membership check succeeds, even if its nullifier has been emitted.
Solution
Removing this check because this shouldn't be enforced by the protocol only for reading pending note hashes. The developers should be able to write the same code and expect the same outcome for reading either pending or settled note hashes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Problem
Currently we assign a nullifier counter to a pending note hash. If this value is not zero, it means the note hash is nullified in the same tx by the nullifier with that specific counter.
We use this counter to check that, when reading a pending note, the read request is emitted before the note hash's nullified.
Although this check makes sense, it doesn't align with how reading a settled note hash works. A read request for a settled note hash is valid as long as the membership check succeeds, even if its nullifier has been emitted.
Solution
Removing this check because this shouldn't be enforced by the protocol only for reading pending note hashes. The developers should be able to write the same code and expect the same outcome for reading either pending or settled note hashes.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: