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

Add --val-private-key-file flag for key assignment tx #1159

Closed
jmc000 opened this issue Jul 18, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed

Add --val-private-key-file flag for key assignment tx #1159

jmc000 opened this issue Jul 18, 2023 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
more-info-needed Further information is requested S: ImprovingThings Improving things: Customer requests, performance improvements, reliability and usability type: feature-request New feature or request improvement

Comments

@jmc000
Copy link

jmc000 commented Jul 18, 2023

Summary

This issue aims to propose adding a flag to key-assignment command in order to make it simpler for validator that are using a remote signer.

Problem Definition

When a validator use a remote signer then the $HOME/.gaia/config/priv_validator_key.json file is not / should not be the right private key used to sign blocks.

So when doing key-assignment the validator would have to re-initiate a temporary .gaia folder, reconfigure the CLI endpoint & chain-id, import a wallet to sign the tx and import the correct priv_validator_key.json in order to be able to make his key-assignment tx.

This is a bit annoying and I think it could be improve simply by adding a flag to the gaiad tx provider assign-consensus-key command.
It can also be quite confusing, as shown by the many messages on Discord for the Stride ICS migration.

Proposal

Add a flag to gaiad tx provider assign-consensus-key command that allow to point to a specific priv_validator_key.json file.

gaiad tx provider assign-consensus-key <consumer-chain-id> <consumer-pubkey> --priv-validator-key-file /tmp/priv_validator_key.json --from validator --home $HOME/.gaia ...

If the --priv-validator-key-file flag is not specified then use the private key inside the home folder

@jmc000 jmc000 added type: feature-request New feature or request improvement admin: epic An EPIC -- meta issue used to track a body of work status: waiting-triage This issue/PR has not yet been triaged by the team. labels Jul 18, 2023
@MSalopek MSalopek self-assigned this Jul 21, 2023
@MSalopek
Copy link
Contributor

MSalopek commented Jul 21, 2023

Hi, thanks for opening the issue!
It would be great to improve UX around this procedure.

I am looking into your concerns but I have some questions, if you don't mind?

What would be the role of the --priv-validator-key and how do you imagine it could be used?
Besides that, could you point me to the remote signer you are using so I can check it out?


Some context:

The priv_validator_key.json contains a tendermint consensus key that the node will use to sign blocks.

<consumer-pubkey> is a public key of a consensus key that will be used on consumer chain, also to sign blocks.

The --from key is not a consensus key it is an account key.

  • the --from is not used to sign blocks on the network
  • the purpose of that key is to derive your valoper and delegation addresses and enable you to sign Txs on chain.

The software uses the --from to verify validator identity - the Tx signer must be the actual account key of the validator operator.

Thanks again!

@MSalopek
Copy link
Contributor

Issue marked as blocked until more context is available from original poster or other interested parties.

Please do not close this issue yet, more feedback is needed.

@mpoke mpoke removed the admin: epic An EPIC -- meta issue used to track a body of work label Aug 31, 2023
@mpoke mpoke added S: ImprovingThings Improving things: Customer requests, performance improvements, reliability and usability more-info-needed Further information is requested and removed status: waiting-triage This issue/PR has not yet been triaged by the team. labels Sep 14, 2023
@MSalopek
Copy link
Contributor

Since there was no activity after requesting more data and feedback I will go ahead and close this issue.

Feel free to tag me or reopen if the situation changes.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
more-info-needed Further information is requested S: ImprovingThings Improving things: Customer requests, performance improvements, reliability and usability type: feature-request New feature or request improvement
Projects
Status: ✅ Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants