Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

The hashes ordering in the secio handshake can be identical #479

Closed
tomaka opened this issue Sep 13, 2018 · 3 comments
Closed

The hashes ordering in the secio handshake can be identical #479

tomaka opened this issue Sep 13, 2018 · 3 comments
Labels
difficulty:hard difficulty:moderate getting-started Issues that can be tackled if you don't know the internals of libp2p very well priority:important The changes needed are critical for libp2p, or are blocking another project

Comments

@tomaka
Copy link
Member

tomaka commented Sep 13, 2018

I didn't think this was possible, but apparently there are crashes: paritytech/polkadot#18

Even if the two network public keys are identical, we incorporate the random nonces and that should be enough to remove any possibility of a collision.
@tomaka tomaka added priority:important The changes needed are critical for libp2p, or are blocking another project difficulty:moderate difficulty:hard labels Sep 13, 2018
@tomaka
Copy link
Member Author

tomaka commented Sep 13, 2018

@twittner Any idea?

@twittner
Copy link
Contributor

It seems that for some unknown reason we read a remote key and nonce equal to ours. Given that a simple echo of our local proposition could do this I don't think we should panic. However I don't have an explanation why this happened here.

@twittner twittner mentioned this issue Sep 14, 2018
Merged
@tomaka tomaka mentioned this issue Dec 21, 2018
Closed
@tomaka tomaka added the getting-started Issues that can be tackled if you don't know the internals of libp2p very well label Feb 21, 2019
@tomaka
Copy link
Member Author

tomaka commented Mar 22, 2019

Why this happened remains a mystery.
However we now properly return an error, and this error has never been seen in the wild in the past few months, so let's close this.

@tomaka tomaka closed this as completed Mar 22, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
difficulty:hard difficulty:moderate getting-started Issues that can be tackled if you don't know the internals of libp2p very well priority:important The changes needed are critical for libp2p, or are blocking another project
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@twittner @tomaka