Outsource signature verification from masp vp #3312
Comments
cwgoes
modified the milestones:
Phase 3: activate IBC and shielded pool,
Phase 1: mainnet genesis
brentstone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 22, 2024
* grarco/outsource-masp-sig-verification: Transfer transaction fails if masp transparent inputs are not debited Changelog #3312 Masp vp checks that no unneeded actions are pushed Transfer transaction pushes masp actions Renames masp signers to authorizers Refactors masp action checks Masp vp checks for signer actions Moves signatures verification from masp vp to the affected vps
brentstone
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jul 24, 2024
* origin/grarco/outsource-masp-sig-verification: Transfer transaction fails if masp transparent inputs are not debited Changelog #3312 Masp vp checks that no unneeded actions are pushed Transfer transaction pushes masp actions Renames masp signers to authorizers Refactors masp action checks Masp vp checks for signer actions Moves signatures verification from masp vp to the affected vps
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently we check some signatures in the masp vp when the balance changes of a transaction do not match the state transition implied by the masp
Transaction.We might be able to move this check back to the involved validity predicated by using a masp
Action. More specifically, instead of verifying the signatures we can check that their vps have been triggered and let the validation up to them.However, these vps may not be triggered by the transaction, so the transaction itself should write an
Action(a temporary value in storage that doesn't get committed to storage) to manually trigger these vps. If the transaction fails to do so, the check in the masp vp on the triggered vps will fail, leading to a rejection of the tx.This would decouple the validation logic of the involved addresses from the masp vp (allowing custom logics) and could lead to less signatures verification (with the current implementation we could end up verifying the same signature twice, once in the user vp and the second time in the masp vp).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: