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

chore: add update team spam ACs #2159

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Feb 6, 2024
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 2 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
2 changes: 2 additions & 0 deletions protocol/0062-SPAM-spam_protection.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -122,6 +122,8 @@ More than 360 delegation changes in one epoch (or, respectively, the value of `s
- A party who has submitted strictly more than `spam.protection.max.applyReferralCode` `ApplyReferralCode` transactions in an epoch should have any future `ApplyReferralCode` transactions in that epoch **pre-block** rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-031" href="#0062-SPAM-031">0062-SPAM-031</a>).
- A party who has submitted more than `spam.protection.max.applyReferralCode` transactions in the current epoch plus in the current block, should have their transactions submitted in the current block **pre-block** rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-036" href="#0062-SPAM-036">0062-SPAM-036</a>).
- Given longer than `spam.protection.balanceSnapshotFrequency` has elapsed since a party deposited or transferred funds, a party who has less then `spam.protection.updatePartyProfile.min.funds` in their accounts should have any `UpdatePartyProfile` transactions **pre-block** rejected. All assets count towards this threshold and balances should be scaled appropriately by the assets quantum. (<a name="0062-SPAM-037" href="#0062-SPAM-037">0062-SPAM-037</a>).
- A party holding less than `spam.protection.referralProgram.min.funds` x quantum should have any `UpdateReferralSettransactions` pre-block rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-040" href="#0062-SPAM-040">0062-SPAM-040</a>).
gordsport marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- A party holding no less than `spam.protection.referralProgram.min.funds` x quantum and staking no less than `referralProgram.minStakedVegaTokens` should not have any `UpdateReferralSettransactions` pre-block rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-041" href="#0062-SPAM-041">0062-SPAM-041</a>).
- A party who has submitted strictly more than `spam.protection.max.updatePartyProfile` `UpdatePartyProfile` transactions in an epoch should have any future `UpdatePartyProfile` transactions in that epoch **pre-block** rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-038" href="#0062-SPAM-038">0062-SPAM-038</a>).
- A party who has submitted more than `spam.protection.max.updatePartyProfile` `UpdatePartyProfile` transactions in the current epoch plus in the current block, should have their `UpdatePartyProfile` transactions submitted in the current block **pre-block** rejected (<a name="0062-SPAM-039" href="#0062-SPAM-039">0062-SPAM-039</a>).

Expand Down
5 changes: 4 additions & 1 deletion protocol/features.json
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -54,9 +54,12 @@
"0088-PPRF-005",
"0062-SPAM-033",
"0062-SPAM-035",
"0062-SPAM-036",
"0062-SPAM-037",
"0062-SPAM-038",
"0062-SPAM-039"
"0062-SPAM-039",
"0062-SPAM-040",
"0062-SPAM-041"
gordsport marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
]
},
"Fixed size amendments": {
Expand Down
Loading