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

vrfs attack Byzantine test #673

Merged
merged 16 commits into from Nov 4, 2022
Merged

vrfs attack Byzantine test #673

merged 16 commits into from Nov 4, 2022

Conversation

rrrooommmaaa
Copy link
Contributor

@rrrooommmaaa rrrooommmaaa commented Nov 14, 2021

Add next integration test:

# 1. All nodes communicate honestly until round 10th
# 2. Lock notarization of round 10 in all nodes (block verification tickets sending)
# 3. The adversarial node sends VRF for round 11
# 4. All nodes receive adversarial node VRF for round 11, cache it and unblock the sending of pending verification tickets 
# 5. Verify whether the network continues operating correctly

Check the created integration test by running the next commands.

$ ./docker.local/bin/build.miners-integration-tests.sh && ./docker.local/bin/build.miners-integration-tests.sh

$ ./docker.local/bin/start.conductor.sh spam-miners

Although not used it also adds a directive to check whether a round was finalized.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Apr 15, 2022

Codecov Report

Merging #673 (f71dbee) into staging (ac9304d) will decrease coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##           staging     #673      +/-   ##
===========================================
- Coverage    27.09%   27.03%   -0.06%     
===========================================
  Files          349      350       +1     
  Lines        57995    58087      +92     
===========================================
- Hits         15713    15704       -9     
- Misses       40379    40484     +105     
+ Partials      1903     1899       -4     
Flag Coverage Δ
Unit-Tests 27.03% <0.00%> (-0.06%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
code/go/0chain.net/miner/m_handler.go 3.57% <ø> (ø)
code/go/0chain.net/miner/m_handler_main.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
code/go/0chain.net/miner/protocol_receive.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
code/go/0chain.net/miner/protocol_receive_main.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
code/go/0chain.net/miner/protocol_send.go 6.66% <0.00%> (-2.23%) ⬇️
code/go/0chain.net/miner/protocol_send_main.go 33.33% <0.00%> (+22.80%) ⬆️
...de/go/0chain.net/smartcontract/vestingsc/config.go 48.94% <0.00%> (-4.74%) ⬇️
code/go/0chain.net/chaincore/chain/handler.go 7.49% <0.00%> (-0.18%) ⬇️
...e/go/0chain.net/smartcontract/dbs/event/process.go 2.29% <0.00%> (-0.11%) ⬇️
code/go/0chain.net/sharder/chain.go 4.95% <0.00%> (-0.05%) ⬇️
... and 3 more

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

@rrrooommmaaa rrrooommmaaa self-assigned this Apr 17, 2022
Copy link
Contributor

@fabioDMFerreira fabioDMFerreira left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What's the expected result of this test? Is this test to check whether the miners blacklist the spamming miner?

I couldn't also get the spamming mechanism. Are we considering the spam mechanism to be the miner forcing the existence of 2 uncompleted rounds?

@fabioDMFerreira fabioDMFerreira force-pushed the rrrooommmaaa/vrfs-attack branch 2 times, most recently from 6d736b2 to 7ece67c Compare May 23, 2022 07:55
@fabioDMFerreira fabioDMFerreira force-pushed the rrrooommmaaa/vrfs-attack branch 2 times, most recently from 39fc22c to 0596d78 Compare June 7, 2022 07:58
@fabioDMFerreira
Copy link
Contributor

@dabasov any other changes, you want me to do?

@sagchain
Copy link

sagchain commented Oct 3, 2022

@dabasov should we even track this? This has open without any activity since long.

Copy link
Member

@peterlimg peterlimg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM, good job 👍

@peterlimg peterlimg dismissed stale reviews from dabasov and fabioDMFerreira November 4, 2022 09:54

fixed as required

@peterlimg peterlimg merged commit ea020dd into staging Nov 4, 2022
@peterlimg peterlimg deleted the rrrooommmaaa/vrfs-attack branch November 4, 2022 09:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants