Aggregator Publishing to Smart contract #125
Conversation
…th EVM-compatible blockchains, including contract deployment, transaction sending, and event listening. updates dependencies
WalkthroughThe pull request introduces several enhancements to the event handling and Ethereum interaction capabilities within the ciphernode core. Key changes include the expansion of the Changes
Possibly related issues
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Poem
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 11
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_aggregator.rs (1)
Line range hint
1-89: Overall impact of changes and future considerationsThe addition of the EVM caller connection expands the
MainAggregator's capabilities. While the changes are minimal and well-integrated, consider the following for future development:
- The TODO comment about adding supervision logic remains unaddressed. Consider creating a ticket or issue to track this task if it's still relevant.
- As the
MainAggregatorgrows in complexity, it might be beneficial to refactor theattachmethod for better readability and maintainability.- Ensure that error handling for the new connection is consistent with the existing error handling strategy in the
attachmethod.Would you like assistance in creating a plan for implementing the supervision logic or refactoring the
attachmethod?packages/ciphernode/core/src/sortition.rs (2)
87-89: LGTM:get_nodesmethod implementation is correct.The
get_nodesmethod correctly returns aVec<String>containing all nodes. The implementation is straightforward and does what it's supposed to do.Consider adding a comment about the potential performance impact of cloning for large sets of nodes. This might be useful information for future optimizations if needed.
Line range hint
65-140: Overall changes look good and enhance theSortitionfunctionality.The new
GetNodesmessage and associated handler provide a clean way to retrieve all nodes from theSortitionstruct. These additions integrate well with the existing code and follow the established patterns in the file. The changes enhance the functionality without introducing any apparent conflicts or inconsistencies.Consider documenting the purpose and usage of the new
GetNodesfunctionality in the module or struct-level comments. This would help maintain clear API documentation as the codebase grows.packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_contracts.rs (2)
49-49: Avoid unnecessary cloning of thesignerobjectIn the following line, the
signeris cloned:let wallet = EthereumWallet::from(signer.clone());If possible, avoid cloning the
signerto improve performance and resource utilization. Consider borrowing or moving thesignerif theEthereumWallet::frommethod allows it.
62-84: Consider adding unit tests for blockchain interaction methodsAdding unit tests for the
publish_plaintext_outputandpublish_committeemethods will help ensure they function correctly and handle edge cases appropriately, especially given the complexity of interacting with smart contracts.Would you like assistance in generating initial unit tests for these methods?
packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_caller.rs (1)
109-109: Implement proof generationThere's a
TODOcomment indicating that proof generation needs to be implemented:Bytes::default(), // TODO: Implement proof generationWould you like assistance in implementing the proof generation? I can help draft the code or open a GitHub issue to track this task.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (7)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/events.rs (0 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_caller.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_contracts.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/lib.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_aggregator.rs (2 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_ciphernode.rs (2 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/sortition.rs (3 hunks)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/events.rs
🔇 Additional comments (11)
packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_aggregator.rs (2)
6-6: LGTM: New import added forconnect_evm_callerThe new import is correctly added and aligns with the changes made in the
attachmethod.
56-56: New EVM caller connection addedThe new call to
connect_evm_callerhas been successfully integrated into theattachmethod. However, please consider the following points:
- The return value is currently ignored (
let _). Ensure this is intentional and doesn't discard important information or error states.- Verify that the order of connections (enclave, registry, caller) is correct for your use case.
- Consider adding a comment explaining the purpose of this new connection for better code documentation.
To ensure the
connect_evm_callerfunction is implemented correctly, let's verify its definition:✅ Verification successful
connect_evm_callerfunction implementation verifiedThe
connect_evm_callerfunction has been successfully implemented and is present in the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Verify the implementation of connect_evm_caller function # Test: Search for the function definition ast-grep --lang rust --pattern 'pub async fn connect_evm_caller($$$)'Length of output: 71
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Broadly verify the implementation of connect_evm_caller function without assuming 'pub' visibility # Test: Search for the asynchronous function definition without 'pub' ast-grep --lang rust --pattern 'async fn connect_evm_caller($$$)' # Alternative Test: Use ripgrep to search for the function definition rg 'async\s+fn\s+connect_evm_caller'Length of output: 182
packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_ciphernode.rs (3)
4-6: LGTM: Import statement updated correctly.The import of
evm_caller::connect_evm_callerhas been added appropriately, aligning with the new functionality introduced in theattachmethod.
Line range hint
1-101: Verify proper resource management for the new EVM caller connection.The addition of the
connect_evm_callerfunction enhances theMainCiphernode's connectivity features. However, it's important to ensure that this new connection is properly managed throughout the lifecycle of theMainCiphernode.Please verify:
- Is there a corresponding disconnect or cleanup method for this new EVM caller connection?
- Is this connection properly closed when the
MainCiphernodeis shut down or destroyed?Ensuring proper resource management will prevent potential resource leaks or lingering connections.
To check for existing disconnect or cleanup methods:
Consider implementing a
disconnectorcleanupmethod in theMainCiphernodestruct to ensure all connections, including this new EVM caller connection, are properly closed when the actor is stopped or destroyed.
65-72:⚠️ Potential issueConsider adding error handling for
connect_evm_caller.While the new function call to
connect_evm_calleris consistent with the existing pattern, there are a couple of points to consider:
- The result of the function call is currently ignored with
let _. This might hide potential errors or important return values.- There's no error handling or logging for this new connection, which could make debugging issues difficult in the future.
Consider the following improvements:
- Handle the result of
connect_evm_callerexplicitly.- Add error logging if the connection fails.
- Optionally, add a success log message for better traceability.
Here's a suggested implementation:
match connect_evm_caller( bus.clone(), sortition.clone(), rpc_url, enclave_contract, registry_contract, ) .await { Ok(result) => { // Log success if needed // log::info!("Successfully connected EVM caller"); // Use the result if needed } Err(e) => { log::error!("Failed to connect EVM caller: {:?}", e); // Handle the error appropriately (e.g., return early, panic, etc.) } }This approach will provide better visibility into the success or failure of the EVM caller connection.
To ensure consistent error handling across similar function calls, let's check the implementation of other
connect_*functions:✅ Verification successful
<!-- [monologue] [task verification_1/1] Analyze the shell script output to determine if other `connect_*` functions handle errors appropriately. [observations] - Three `connect_*` functions were found: `connect_evm_caller`, `connect_evm_enclave`, and `connect_evm_ciphernode_registry`. - `connect_evm_caller` returns a `Result` and uses the `?` operator for error propagation. - `connect_evm_enclave` uses `.unwrap()`, which can cause the program to panic on errors. - `connect_evm_ciphernode_registry` returns a `Result` and uses the `?` operator. [analysis] - There's inconsistency in error handling across `connect_*` functions. - While some functions propagate errors using `?`, others use `.unwrap()`, which is not ideal for error management. - The original review comment suggests adding error handling, which aligns with improving consistency. - The inconsistency itself could lead to potential issues, supporting the need for the suggested changes. [actions] Conclude that the review comment is valid and suggests adding proper error handling to ensure consistency and improve error management across all `connect_*` functions. --> **The review comment is valid and should be addressed.** The inconsistency in error handling across `connect_*` functions can lead to unexpected behaviors and make debugging more challenging. To maintain consistency and improve robustness, consider the following actions: 1. **Update `connect_evm_caller` to handle results explicitly**, as initially suggested. 2. **Refactor `connect_evm_enclave` to use proper error handling instead of `.unwrap()`.** For example: ```rust match evm_manager .send(AddListener { contract_address }) .await { Ok(listener) => { // Handle the listener as needed } Err(e) => { log::error!("Failed to add listener: {:?}", e); // Handle the error appropriately } } ``` 3. **Ensure `connect_evm_ciphernode_registry` consistently propagates errors using `?` or similar mechanisms.** Implementing consistent error handling across all `connect_*` functions will enhance the reliability and maintainability of the codebase.🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash # Description: Check error handling in other connect_* functions rg --type rust -A 10 'fn connect_' packages/ciphernode/core/src/Length of output: 2829
packages/ciphernode/core/src/sortition.rs (2)
65-67: LGTM: NewGetNodesmessage struct looks good.The
GetNodesmessage struct is correctly defined with the appropriate attributes. It's a simple and clear way to request a list of nodes.
134-140: LGTM:Handler<GetNodes>implementation is correct and concise.The handler for the
GetNodesmessage is implemented correctly. It simply calls theget_nodesmethod and returns the result, which is exactly what we want it to do.packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_contracts.rs (2)
51-54: Verify thatwith_recommended_fillers()aligns with your transaction requirementsThe
ProviderBuilderuseswith_recommended_fillers()to automatically handle transaction parameters:let provider = ProviderBuilder::new() .with_recommended_fillers() .wallet(wallet) .on_builtin(rpc_url) .await?;Ensure that these default fillers for gas, nonce, and chain ID are appropriate for your use case and target network. If custom configurations are needed, consider manually setting up the fillers to match your application's requirements.
27-27:⚠️ Potential issueVerify the correct usage of
onlyOwnermodifier in function declarationIn the
RegistryFiltercontract, the functionpublishCommitteeincludes theonlyOwnermodifier directly in the function signature:function publishCommittee(uint256 e3Id, address[] memory nodes, bytes memory publicKey) external onlyOwner;Please verify that the
sol!macro correctly supports the inclusion of modifiers likeonlyOwnerin the function declaration. In Solidity, modifiers are typically specified in the implementation, and their usage within the macro may differ. This could potentially lead to issues during contract interaction.packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_caller.rs (2)
84-84: Log a warning if theregistrycontract is not foundIn the current implementation, if the
registrycontract is not found in thecontractsmap, the code silently skips the publishing step.Ensure that the
registrycontract is always added before this code executes. If there's a possibility it might not be present, consider logging a warning.Apply this diff:
if let Some(contract) = contracts.get("registry") { // existing code } else { - // Do nothing + log::warn!("Registry contract not found. Cannot publish committee public key."); }
104-104: Log a warning if theenclavecontract is not foundSimilarly, if the
enclavecontract is not found, the publishing step is skipped without any notice.Consider logging a warning to help with debugging.
Apply this diff:
if let Some(contract) = contracts.get("enclave") { // existing code } else { - // Do nothing + log::warn!("Enclave contract not found. Cannot publish plaintext output."); }
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (5)
packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/node.rs (2)
14-15: Improved CLI arguments, but consider clarity of short identifierThe addition of a short identifier and the explicit kebab-cased long identifier enhance the CLI interface. However, the short identifier 'c' might be ambiguous as it could represent either "contract" or "cipher" in this context.
Consider using a more specific short identifier, such as 'r' for "registry". If 'r' is not available due to its use for "rpc", you might want to reconsider the short identifiers holistically for all arguments to ensure clarity and avoid potential confusion.
8-15: Overall improvement to CLI arguments, with minor considerationsThe changes consistently enhance the CLI interface by introducing short identifiers and ensuring kebab-cased long identifiers for all
Argsstruct fields. This improves usability and adheres to common CLI conventions.However, there are a few points to consider:
- The change of the 'rpc' short identifier from 'n' to 'r' may impact existing scripts or documentation.
- The choice of 'c' as a short identifier for
registry_contractmight be slightly ambiguous.Consider:
- Documenting these CLI changes in the project's changelog or README.
- Reviewing the choice of short identifiers holistically to ensure they are intuitive and unambiguous.
- Adding a deprecation warning for the old '-n' flag if backward compatibility is a concern.
To future-proof the CLI interface, consider implementing a version flag for the CLI itself. This would allow for easier management of breaking changes in the future. You could implement this using Clap's built-in versioning feature.
packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/aggregator.rs (1)
Line range hint
1-45: Summary of changes and potential impact.The changes in this file improve the command-line interface of the aggregator and introduce a new
registry_filter_contractfeature. These modifications enhance usability and extend functionality. However, they may have the following impacts:
- Existing scripts or documentation referencing the old command-line flags will need to be updated.
- The
MainAggregator::attachmethod and any related code will need to accommodate the newregistry_filter_contractparameter.- Users of this tool will need to be informed about the new argument and its purpose.
Consider the following to ensure a smooth transition:
- Update all relevant documentation, including README files and any user guides.
- If this is a breaking change, consider updating the version number accordingly.
- Provide migration instructions for users updating from a previous version.
tests/basic_integration/test.sh (2)
21-21: LGTM. Consider using a configurable address.The addition of the REGISTRY_FILTER_CONTRACT environment variable is good. However, consider making this address configurable or deriving it from the Hardhat environment to improve flexibility in different test scenarios.
You could modify this line to use an environment variable with a default value:
export REGISTRY_FILTER_CONTRACT="${REGISTRY_FILTER_CONTRACT:-0xDc64a140Aa3E981100a9becA4E685f962f0cF6C9}"This allows overriding the address when needed while maintaining the current behavior as default.
134-134: LGTM. Consider adding error handling.The dynamic retrieval of the public key is a good improvement over a hardcoded value. This change enhances the flexibility and reusability of the script.
Consider adding error handling to ensure the public key is read correctly:
if ! PUBLIC_KEY=$(xxd -p -c 10000000 "$SCRIPT_DIR/output/pubkey.bin"); then echo "Error: Failed to read public key from $SCRIPT_DIR/output/pubkey.bin" >&2 exit 1 fiThis modification will cause the script to exit with an error message if the public key cannot be read, improving debugging in case of issues.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_caller.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_aggregator.rs (3 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_ciphernode.rs (1 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/aggregator.rs (2 hunks)
- packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/node.rs (1 hunks)
- tests/basic_integration/test.sh (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/evm_caller.rs
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_aggregator.rs
- packages/ciphernode/core/src/main_ciphernode.rs
🔇 Additional comments (5)
packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/node.rs (3)
8-9: LGTM: Improved CLI argument for addressThe addition of a short identifier 'a' for the address field enhances the CLI usability while maintaining the existing long form option.
12-13: LGTM: Enhanced CLI arguments for enclave contractThe addition of the short identifier 'e' and the explicit setting of the kebab-cased long identifier "enclave-contract" improve the CLI interface consistency and usability.
10-11: Improved CLI argument for RPC, but consider backward compatibilityChanging the short identifier from 'n' to 'r' for the RPC field is more intuitive. However, this change might break existing scripts or documentation using the old '-n' form.
To check for potential impacts, run:
packages/ciphernode/enclave_node/src/bin/aggregator.rs (1)
28-32: Approve changes tomainfunction with verification request.The new
registry_filter_contractargument is correctly parsed, validated, and passed toMainAggregator::attach.Please ensure that the
MainAggregator::attachmethod has been updated to accept this new argument. Run the following command to check:#!/bin/bash # Check MainAggregator::attach method signature rg -A 10 'impl MainAggregator' --type rustVerify that the output shows the updated method signature including the
registry_filter_contractparameter.Also applies to: 39-39
tests/basic_integration/test.sh (1)
140-140: LGTM. Verify the public key format.The use of the dynamically retrieved PUBLIC_KEY in the e3:activate command is a good improvement. It eliminates the hardcoded value and makes the script more flexible.
To ensure the public key is in the correct format, you can add a verification step before using it:
This script will help catch any potential issues with the public key format before it's used in the e3:activate command.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 0
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.github/workflows/integration.yml (1)
Line range hint
3-15: Security improvement: Use GitHub secrets for sensitive dataWhile addressing the private key issue, it's also important to secure other sensitive data in the workflow.
Please make the following changes:
- Remove the hardcoded mnemonic and Infura API key:
- HARDHAT_VAR_MNEMONIC: "test test test test test test test test test test test junk" - HARDHAT_VAR_INFURA_API_KEY: "zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz"
- Uncomment and use the GitHub secrets references:
+ HARDHAT_VAR_MNEMONIC: ${{ secrets.Mnemonic }} + HARDHAT_VAR_INFURA_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.InfuraApiKey }}
Ensure that you've added the corresponding secrets in your GitHub repository settings.
Consider uncommenting and using other secret references as needed for your project:
HARDHAT_VAR_ARBISCAN_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.ArbiscanApiKey }} HARDHAT_VAR_BSCSCAN_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.BscscanApiKey }} HARDHAT_VAR_ETHERSCAN_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.EtherscanApiKey }} HARDHAT_VAR_OPTIMISM_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.OptimismApiKey }} HARDHAT_VAR_POLYGONSCAN_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.PolygonscanApiKey }} HARDHAT_VAR_SNOWTRACE_API_KEY: ${{ secrets.SnowtraceApiKey }}These changes will significantly improve the security of your workflow by ensuring that no sensitive data is exposed in the repository.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Gitleaks
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
📜 Review details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (2)
- .github/workflows/integration.yml (1 hunks)
- tests/basic_integration/test.sh (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
- tests/basic_integration/test.sh
🧰 Additional context used
🪛 Gitleaks
.github/workflows/integration.yml
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
.github/workflows/integration.yml (2)
Line range hint
1-70: Workflow structure looks good, address security issuesThe overall structure and steps of the INTEGRATION workflow are well-organized and follow good practices for CI/CD in a blockchain project. It covers essential steps such as environment setup, dependency management, linting, contract compilation, and testing.
However, it's crucial to address the security issues mentioned in the previous comments:
- Remove the hardcoded private key and use GitHub secrets.
- Secure the mnemonic and API keys by using GitHub secrets.
Once these security improvements are implemented, the workflow will be both functional and secure, providing a solid foundation for your project's integration testing.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Gitleaks
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
6-6:⚠️ Potential issueCritical security issue: Remove hardcoded private key
The addition of a hardcoded private key in this workflow file poses a severe security risk. Private keys should never be exposed in version control or public repositories.
Please remove the hardcoded private key immediately and use GitHub secrets instead. Here's how to fix this:
- Remove the hardcoded private key:
- PRIVATE_KEY: "0xac0974bec39a17e36ba4a6b4d238ff944bacb478cbed5efcae784d7bf4f2ff80"
Add the private key as a GitHub secret named
PRIVATE_KEY.Reference the secret in the workflow file:
+ PRIVATE_KEY: ${{ secrets.PRIVATE_KEY }}This approach ensures that sensitive data is not exposed in your repository while still being accessible to your workflow.
To ensure no other instances of hardcoded private keys exist, run the following command:
If this command returns any results, please review and secure those instances as well.
🧰 Tools
🪛 Gitleaks
6-6: Detected a Generic API Key, potentially exposing access to various services and sensitive operations.
(generic-api-key)
Summary by CodeRabbit
Summary by CodeRabbit
New Features
EvmCallermodule for managing interactions with Ethereum contracts.Bug Fixes
Documentation
MainAggregatorandMainCiphernode.