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

Validators cannot verify mining proofs efficiently #4963

Closed
sagar-solana opened this issue Jul 8, 2019 · 5 comments
Closed

Validators cannot verify mining proofs efficiently #4963

sagar-solana opened this issue Jul 8, 2019 · 5 comments
Labels
locked issue stale [bot only] Added to stale content; results in auto-close after a week.
Milestone

Comments

@sagar-solana
Copy link
Contributor

Problem

Validators cannot verify mining proofs right now since the function that does the verification assumes the offsets are the same for all proofs. This function also does not correctly generate offsets.

Proposed Solution

The verification function (chacha_cbc_encrypt_file_many_keys) needs to be updated to understand how proofs are generated.

  • Per segment that is being verified, this function needs to map encryption keys to offsets per key so that the hashes that are generated are mapped to each key.
  • Offset generation on the validator needs to factor in the segment size correctly and then we know the sample range by num_bytes/block_size.

Tag: @sakridge

@sagar-solana sagar-solana added this to the Mavericks v0.18.0 milestone Jul 8, 2019
@sagar-solana
Copy link
Contributor Author

@sakridge you think you'll be able to look into this at some point?

@mvines mvines modified the milestones: Mavericks v0.18.0, v0.19.0 Aug 8, 2019
@mvines mvines added this to To do in Archivers via automation Sep 3, 2019
@mvines mvines modified the milestones: Jaws v0.19.0, Sultans v0.21.0 Sep 3, 2019
@mvines mvines modified the milestones: Supertubes v0.22.0, v0.23.0 Nov 25, 2019
@mvines mvines modified the milestones: Tofino v0.23.0, The Future! Jan 13, 2020
@jon-chuang
Copy link
Contributor

I can look into this in 6 weeks time.

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 2, 2021

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.

@stale stale bot added the stale [bot only] Added to stale content; results in auto-close after a week. label Jun 2, 2021
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jun 16, 2021

This stale issue has been automatically closed. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot closed this as completed Jun 16, 2021
@github-actions
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Apr 3, 2022

This issue has been automatically locked since there has not been any activity in past 7 days after it was closed. Please open a new issue for related bugs.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 3, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
locked issue stale [bot only] Added to stale content; results in auto-close after a week.
Projects
No open projects
Archivers
  
To do
Storage Mining
  
Awaiting triage
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants