[WIP] Transaction verifier #1100
Closed
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dconnolly
added
A-consensus
27 tasks
dconnolly
commented
Sep 26, 2020
dconnolly
commented
Sep 26, 2020
hdevalence
reviewed
Sep 28, 2020
Comment on lines
+27
to
+35
| /// The different SigHash types, as defined in https://zips.z.cash/zip-0143 | ||
| pub struct HashType: u32 { | ||
| /// | ||
| const ALL = 0b0000_0001; | ||
| /// | ||
| const NONE = 0b0000_0010; | ||
| /// | ||
| const SINGLE = Self::ALL.bits | Self::NONE.bits; | ||
| /// |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The empty doc comments prevent a linter from ever noticing that they're empty, so I think it would be preferable to avoid adding them.
dconnolly
force-pushed
the
transaction-verifier
branch
2 times, most recently
from
9c05425 to
eca674a
Compare
Co-Authored-By: Deirdre Connolly <deirdre@zfnd.org>
…ecks module Also stub out the queuing of all RedJubjub async batch signature validation and spend/output Groth16 proof verification and collecting of those resulting futures in async_checks
yaahc
force-pushed
the
transaction-verifier
branch
from
8111e69 to
91c8013
Compare
|
We rebased this onto #961. |
dconnolly
commented
Oct 15, 2020
str4d
reviewed
Oct 15, 2020
Comment on lines
+77
to
+78
| /// transaction transfers no money | ||
| NoTransfer, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is a misleading name, as it suggests that the consensus rules verify that zero-value coins and notes cannot be spent. The actual rules that lead to this error are only checking for the presence of inputs / spends.
daira
reviewed
Oct 15, 2020
|
Hi all, just a heads' up that this PR will be rebased and split into the part that sets up the plumbing for the transaction verification service, and the part that adds the consensus rules, which will be split off into separate PRs. I'm hoping to get this done in the next few hours. |
This was referenced Oct 16, 2020
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a high-level sketch of what our
TransactionVerifiershould do. Right now it's calling signature batch verifiers that we may not want to use anymore, and(Spend|Output|JoinSplit)Verifiers that don't exist yet, and is incomplete in all its checks and outputs, but you get the idea.