Feat: Mark invalid shares #1313
Conversation
eth/eventhandler/handlers.go
Outdated
| if isOperatorShare && !validatorShare.InvalidSecret { | ||
| eh.metrics.ValidatorInactive(event.PublicKey) | ||
| ownShare = validatorShare | ||
| logger = logger.With(zap.Bool("own_validator", isOperatorShare)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we can log that its our validator regardless of invalid secret, and also we should probably log if its an invalid secret (so its hard to miss in Kibana)
| if isOperatorShare && !validatorShare.InvalidSecret { | |
| eh.metrics.ValidatorInactive(event.PublicKey) | |
| ownShare = validatorShare | |
| logger = logger.With(zap.Bool("own_validator", isOperatorShare)) | |
| if isOperatorShare { | |
| eh.metrics.ValidatorInactive(event.PublicKey) | |
| logger = logger.With(zap.Bool("own_validator", isOperatorShare)) | |
| if validatorShare.InvalidSecret { | |
| logger = logger.With(zap.Bool("invalid_secret", true)) | |
| logger.Debug("registered validator has an invalid share secret, it will not be started") | |
| } else { | |
| ownShare = validatorShare | |
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agree. Added this
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, fmt.Errorf("could not extract validator share from event: %w", err) | ||
|
|
||
| if err != nil && !share.Metadata.InvalidSecret { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is the 2nd check needed? as far as i can see that method returns no error when the secret is invalid
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@moshe-blox, No we can't remove the 2nd check because we have to check that there is no error and share is valid.
Next, in case the share contains invalid secret, then we have to save it and mark as invalid what we do on this line
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh sry, i thought that we're not returning error in validatorAddedEventToShare when only the share is invalid, thats what i previously meant in my comment there
can we try this?
i'm interested to see how it would look, we can just log the reason for invalid secret instead of returning it as error (for example logger.Debug("invalid secret error: could not decrypt share private"))
then this check becomes just a simple err != nil and naturally theres no error that keeps going upstream (back to high level funcs who called us)
|
|
||
| publicKey, err := ssvtypes.DeserializeBLSPublicKey(event.PublicKey) | ||
| if err != nil { | ||
| return nil, nil, &MalformedEventError{ | ||
| return validatorShare, nil, &MalformedEventError{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why did we do this change? is returning an empty share anything better or different than returning nil?
…-shares-stage-fix # Conflicts: # eth/eventhandler/handlers.go # operator/validator/controller.go
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
…-shares-stage-fix # Conflicts: # eth/eventhandler/handlers.go
|
hey @MatusKysel @y0sher yes, and i think we ended up saying my suggestion did not work out well, and this PR would be better in the original form where it returned an error on invalid share (rather than only setting the field and not returning error) |
No description provided.