fix constructor arguments verification #1790
Conversation
ghost
assigned 
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 7a1d07b1-813f-4aed-9cab-14ab29dae27e
💛 - Coveralls |
| arguments_data = String.replace(arguments_data, "0x", "") | ||
| creation_input_data = Chain.contract_creation_input_data(address_hash) | ||
|
|
||
| expected_arguments_data = | ||
| creation_input_data | ||
| |> String.split(bytecode) | ||
| |> String.split("0029") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not well-versed enough in smart contracts, so here's a dumb question: is there a possibility of a false positive (i.e. arguments containing 0029 fragment) and splitting the data at a wrong place?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, this is 100% possible as I was just noticing a few contracts where this occurred. I'll try to find some examples and post here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please see this contract: https://etherscan.io/address/0x64d14595152b430cf6940da15c6e39545c7c5b7e#code
Constructor:
000000000000000000000000802275979b020f0ec871c5ec1db6e412b72ff20b000000000000000000000000f5a38fbc26c720c79350b99d9c0bd42b3e9b83160000000000000000000000002929e21109901461659c0f26ad7f0e7633ea6539000000000000000000000000431f429035a1e3059d5c6a9a83208c6d3143d925
The 3rd argument 0000000000000000000000002929e21109901461659c0f26ad7f0e7633ea6539 contains 0029
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a thought, since we're receiving the constructor arguments from the user why not subtract them from the bytecode leaving us the correct creation code.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@acravenho bytecode provided by a user doesn't contain constructor arguments. or are you talking about subtracting constructor arguments from transaction input data?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@acravenho @goodsoft I updated my PR. Can you please try it? Now, I'm removing source code from transaction data and then I'm checking constructor arguments
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@ayrat555 During the verification process the constructor arguments are supplied by the end user. eth_getCode which is used to obtain the bytecode should also contain this data appended at the bottom.
vbaranov
deleted the
ab-fix-contructor-verification-with-contructor-arguments
branch
fixes #1786
Motivation
Currently, we're assuming that constructor arguments are concatenated with contract code in transaction input data. But some transactions have additional data between source code and constructor arguments in transaction input
Changelog