feat: Open channel helper ignores announcement signatures #91
Conversation
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
Signature exchanges are signed with the node's private key and verified by the counterpart using the node's ID (which is the public key). The signatures should not be the same because lightning implementation and lnprototest do not have the same private key, or better yet, lnprototest will fake a different private key. Unfortunately, we lack the necessary tools to easily create this signature, which makes lnprototest a painful process. Apologies for the inconvenience! Therefore, at some point, we should have a tool to calculate the signatures. But for now, we are leveraging the lightning specification and skipping the announce signature message. This significantly simplifies the workflow. Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
vincenzopalazzo
force-pushed
the
macros/lib_improvment
branch
from
f344044
to
ba32816
Compare
vincenzopalazzo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2023
Fixes a bug in lnprototest by removing the problematic code outlined in patch [1]. During our investigation of the cln code, we discovered that the message verification was not performed correctly as the BOL 7 suggest. This commit includes a patch [2] that fixes the issue and introduces an integration test to validate that core lightning adheres to the signature verification guidelines outlined in BOLT7. [1] #91 [2] ElementsProject/lightning#6384 Reported-by: lnprototest (#91) Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
vincenzopalazzo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 14, 2023
Fixes a bug in lnprototest by removing the problematic code outlined in patch [1]. During our investigation of the cln code, we discovered that the message verification was not performed correctly as the BOL 7 suggest. This commit includes a patch [2] that fixes the issue and introduces an integration test to validate that core lightning adheres to the signature verification guidelines outlined in BOLT7. [1] #91 [2] ElementsProject/lightning#6384 Reported-by: lnprototest (#91) Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
vincenzopalazzo
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 15, 2023
Fixes a bug in lnprototest by removing the problematic code outlined in patch [1]. During our investigation of the cln code, we discovered that the message verification was not performed correctly as the BOL 7 suggest. This commit includes a patch [2] that fixes the issue and introduces an integration test to validate that core lightning adheres to the signature verification guidelines outlined in BOLT7. [1] #91 [2] ElementsProject/lightning#6384 Reported-by: lnprototest (#91) Signed-off-by: Vincenzo Palazzo <vincenzopalazzodev@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Signature exchanges are signed with the node's private key and verified by the counterpart using the node's ID (which is the public key). The signatures should not be the same because the lightning implementation and lnprototest do not have the same private key, or better yet, lnprototest will fake a different private key.
Unfortunately, we lack the tools to easily create this signature, making lnprototest a painful process. Apologies for the inconvenience!
Therefore, we should have a tool to calculate the signatures at some point. But for now, we are leveraging the lightning specification and skipping the announce signature message.
This significantly simplifies the workflow.