P2p message signing component #4460
Conversation
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## feat/optimise-consensus-sigcheck #4460 +/- ##
===================================================================
Coverage ? 75.84%
===================================================================
Files ? 645
Lines ? 85198
Branches ? 0
===================================================================
Hits ? 64619
Misses ? 15781
Partials ? 4798 Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
p2p/messageCheck/messageVerifier.go
Outdated
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| err = pubsub.VerifyMessageSignature(pubsubMsg) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we do not need this. Please use the p2p/crypto/p2pSigner component available on feat/multisigner branch
https://github.com/ElrondNetwork/elrond-go/tree/feat/multisigner/p2p/crypto
There was a problem hiding this comment.
changed to use p2p signer component
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| type messageVerifier struct { | ||
| marshaller marshal.Marshalizer |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the serializer used in the p2p subsystem is not the one used in elrond-go. This needs to be refactored
There was a problem hiding this comment.
refactored to use internal marshaller
| "github.com/stretchr/testify/require" | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| func TestNewMessageVerifier(t *testing.T) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
beside this, we might create an integration test in which we have 2 connected peers that and verify their received messages with the new component
There was a problem hiding this comment.
created the integration test
| mv, err := messagecheck.NewMessageVerifier(args) | ||
| require.Nil(t, err) | ||
|
|
||
| messagesBytes, err := mv.Serialize(messages) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think messages and expected messages are switched (names)
… broadcast instead of send to connected peer
Description of the reasoning behind the pull request (what feature was missing / how the problem was manifesting itself / what was the motive behind the refactoring)
Proposed Changes
Testing procedure