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.

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

Check for invalid addresses in SetAffiliateWhitelist #2594

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 22, 2024

Conversation

teddyding
Copy link
Contributor

@teddyding teddyding commented Nov 21, 2024

Changelist

Check input contains only valid bech32 address in SetAffiliateWhitelist

Test Plan

Unit test

Author/Reviewer Checklist

  • If this PR has changes that result in a different app state given the same prior state and transaction list, manually add the state-breaking label.
  • If the PR has breaking postgres changes to the indexer add the indexer-postgres-breaking label.
  • If this PR isn't state-breaking but has changes that modify behavior in PrepareProposal or ProcessProposal, manually add the label proposal-breaking.
  • If this PR is one of many that implement a specific feature, manually label them all feature:[feature-name].
  • If you wish to for mergify-bot to automatically create a PR to backport your change to a release branch, manually add the label backport/[branch-name].
  • Manually add any of the following labels: refactor, chore, bug.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced validation for setting the affiliate whitelist to ensure only valid addresses are processed.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved error handling for invalid addresses when setting the affiliate whitelist.
  • Tests

    • Added new test cases to ensure robust handling of invalid addresses and duplicate entries in the affiliate whitelist.
    • Updated existing tests to cover additional scenarios and ensure correct fallback behavior for non-whitelisted affiliates.

@teddyding teddyding marked this pull request as ready for review November 21, 2024 22:31
@teddyding teddyding requested a review from a team as a code owner November 21, 2024 22:31
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 21, 2024

Walkthrough

The changes in this pull request focus on enhancing the error handling and validation logic within the SetAffiliateWhitelist method of the keeper.go file. A new validation step checks for invalid Bech32 addresses before processing, improving the reliability of address management. Corresponding updates were made to the keeper_test.go file, introducing new test cases to cover scenarios involving invalid addresses and ensuring robust error handling. Overall, the modifications strengthen the affiliate management functionality without altering existing method signatures or introducing new methods.

Changes

File Change Summary
protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper.go Enhanced error handling and validation in SetAffiliateWhitelist to check for valid Bech32 addresses. Updated comments for clarity.
protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper_test.go Added new test cases for SetAffiliateWhitelist to cover invalid addresses and expanded checks for duplicates and fee share logic. Updated TestGetTakerFeeShareViaWhitelist for non-whitelisted affiliates.

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

protocol, proto

Suggested reviewers

  • affanv14

Poem

🐰 In the realm of code, so bright and clear,
We check our addresses, hold them dear.
With validation strong, no errors in sight,
Whitelist our friends, make everything right!
So hop along, let’s code with glee,
For a robust system, as happy as can be! 🌟


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?

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (2)
protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper.go (2)

Line range hint 313-324: Consider extracting address validation into a helper function.

The same Bech32 address validation logic appears in both SetAffiliateWhitelist and RegisterAffiliate. Consider extracting this into a helper function to promote code reuse and maintainability.

Example implementation:

+// validateBech32Address validates if the given string is a valid Bech32 address
+func (k Keeper) validateBech32Address(address string, context string) error {
+    if _, err := sdk.AccAddressFromBech32(address); err != nil {
+        return errorsmod.Wrapf(types.ErrInvalidAddress, "%s: %s", context, address)
+    }
+    return nil
+}

 func (k Keeper) SetAffiliateWhitelist(ctx sdk.Context, whitelist types.AffiliateWhitelist) error {
     store := ctx.KVStore(k.storeKey)
     addressSet := make(map[string]bool)
     for _, tier := range whitelist.Tiers {
         if tier.TakerFeeSharePpm > types.AffiliatesRevSharePpmCap {
             return errorsmod.Wrapf(types.ErrRevShareSafetyViolation,
                 "taker fee share ppm %d is greater than the cap %d",
                 tier.TakerFeeSharePpm, types.AffiliatesRevSharePpmCap)
         }
         for _, address := range tier.Addresses {
-            if _, err := sdk.AccAddressFromBech32(address); err != nil {
-                return errorsmod.Wrapf(types.ErrInvalidAddress, "address to whitelist: %s", address)
-            }
+            if err := k.validateBech32Address(address, "address to whitelist"); err != nil {
+                return err
+            }

Line range hint 313-324: Add docstring to explain validation rules.

Consider adding a docstring to document the method's purpose and validation rules.

Example:

+// SetAffiliateWhitelist updates the affiliate whitelist with the provided configuration.
+// It performs the following validations:
+// - Ensures all addresses are valid Bech32 addresses
+// - Verifies taker fee share PPM does not exceed the cap
+// - Checks for duplicate addresses across all tiers
 func (k Keeper) SetAffiliateWhitelist(ctx sdk.Context, whitelist types.AffiliateWhitelist) error {
📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e700de9 and fe1639c.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)
  • protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper.go (1 hunks)
  • protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper_test.go (1 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (3)
protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper.go (2)

314-317: LGTM! Clean implementation of address validation.

The implementation correctly validates Bech32 addresses using the standard Cosmos SDK method and follows the codebase's error handling patterns.


314-317: Verify error type definition and test coverage.

Let's verify the error type definition and ensure test coverage exists for invalid addresses.

✅ Verification successful

Error type and test coverage verified successfully

The error type ErrInvalidAddress is properly defined in types/errors.go and comprehensive test coverage exists for invalid address scenarios:

  • Test cases in keeper_test.go verify invalid addresses for both referee and affiliate
  • Test cases in msg_server_test.go cover invalid address validation in message handling
  • Error is properly registered with a unique code (5) and clear error message
🏁 Scripts executed

The following scripts were executed for the analysis:

Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify error type definition and test coverage

# Check if ErrInvalidAddress is properly defined
rg "ErrInvalidAddress.*=.*errors\.Register" -A 2

# Check test coverage for invalid address cases
rg -A 5 "TestSetAffiliateWhitelist.*invalid.*address" --type go

Length of output: 116


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's try different approaches to locate error definitions and tests

# Find error definitions in types package
rg "ErrInvalidAddress" protocol/x/affiliates/types/

# Look for test files related to affiliate whitelist
fd "whitelist.*test\.go" protocol/x/affiliates/

# Search for any test cases containing "invalid address"
rg "invalid.*address" --type go protocol/x/affiliates/

Length of output: 998


Script:

#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the test implementations to verify coverage

# Check the test implementation in keeper_test.go
rg -B 5 -A 10 "invalid_address" protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper_test.go

# Check the test implementation in msg_server_test.go
rg -B 5 -A 10 "invalid_address" protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/msg_server_test.go

# Look at the error definition and its usage
cat protocol/x/affiliates/types/errors.go

Length of output: 2792

protocol/x/affiliates/keeper/keeper_test.go (1)

487-516: LGTM! Good test coverage for address validation.

The new test cases effectively verify the address validation logic in SetAffiliateWhitelist:

  1. Rejection of invalid bech32 addresses
  2. Rejection of validator operator addresses

This ensures robust input validation for the affiliate whitelist.

@teddyding teddyding merged commit 395f448 into main Nov 22, 2024
22 checks passed
@teddyding teddyding deleted the td/check-address-set-affiliate-whitelist branch November 22, 2024 15:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants