-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.6k
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
R4R: Fully verify the signature in gaiacli tx sign
#2995
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
14 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
8e1dc22
Implement auxiliary methods/functions for just building a tx sig bytes
bed6897
Undo auxiliary methods/functions
ed29ee0
Validate signature
22def26
Remove redundant comment
e111fa8
Add pending log entry
6cf0f5a
Minor cleanup
b498e19
Update sign cli doc
1f1f7ac
Update cli sign offline flag doc
b70000e
Update printAndValidateSigs
e44590a
Implement TestGaiaCLIValidateSignatures
40205f7
Minor cleanup
4e72476
Fix linting
21cdebc
Update x/auth/client/cli/sign.go
alessio ac274e2
Minor reformatting
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
probably a better way which we can avoid creating/using this variable altogether (for another PR though)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@rigelrozanski I'm happy to do that in this PR since it's really in context. Do you have suggestions on how to?
We prefer to loop over all the sigs and not short-circuit. In other words, we cannot simply return an error or bool at first sight of a problem. Any suggestions on how to do this without keeping track via a variable?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nope, if the point is to complete the loop before returning an error, then a variable must be used. What's the thinking behind completing the loop before returning?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The idea is that txs can have many signers/signatures. The UX we want to provide should show you all the signatures and either an OK or the ERROR. If we short-circuit, the user doesn't get the full picture.
I'd propose the function is ok.