-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 266
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
Add tests to ensure failure if an oracle maliciously returns note_header.nonce = 0
for a pre-existing note
#1410
Comments
iAmMichaelConnor
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 3, 2023
# Description The way nonces work now, there can be inconsistencies in nonce assignment in the simulator vs the private kernel. Furthermore, you cannot know during function execution what the full set of commitments will be for the whole TX as some new commitments may be nullified and squashed. But we still want the ability to determine nonces and therefore uniqueNoteHashes from L1 calldata alone. I am sure I am not explaining all of the issues well enough, but it was determined that the current nonce paradigm will not work and therefore we must rework it. Rework nonces so that siloing by contract address happens first and uniqueness comes later. For now, nonces are injeced by the private ordering circuit (vs suggestion which was base rollup circuit). Pending notes and their reads have no nonces when processed in kernel. The public kernel (and therefore all commitments created in public functions) does not use nonces. Here was Mike's proposal for the rework: ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/7b20c886-1e92-452c-a886-c3da5ed64e17) Why not just use leaf index as nonce? ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/e6337107-ac93-4a3b-b83c-27213cb5133d) ## Followup tasks * #1029 * #1194 * #1329 * #1407 * #1408 * #1409 * #1410 * Future enhancement: The root rollup circuit could insert all messages at the very beginning of the root rollup circuit, so that txs within the rollup can refer to that state root and read L1>L2 messages immediately. * #1383 * #1386 * We should implement subscription / polling methods for Aztec logs * We should maybe write rpc functions which allow calldata to be subscribed-to, keyed by tx_hash. * If a dapp wants to write a note from a public function, a lot of honus will be on a dapp developer to retain preimage information, query the blockchain, and derive the nonce. We should provide some examples to demonstrate this pattern.
AztecBot
pushed a commit
to AztecProtocol/docs
that referenced
this issue
Aug 3, 2023
# Description The way nonces work now, there can be inconsistencies in nonce assignment in the simulator vs the private kernel. Furthermore, you cannot know during function execution what the full set of commitments will be for the whole TX as some new commitments may be nullified and squashed. But we still want the ability to determine nonces and therefore uniqueNoteHashes from L1 calldata alone. I am sure I am not explaining all of the issues well enough, but it was determined that the current nonce paradigm will not work and therefore we must rework it. Rework nonces so that siloing by contract address happens first and uniqueness comes later. For now, nonces are injeced by the private ordering circuit (vs suggestion which was base rollup circuit). Pending notes and their reads have no nonces when processed in kernel. The public kernel (and therefore all commitments created in public functions) does not use nonces. Here was Mike's proposal for the rework: ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/7b20c886-1e92-452c-a886-c3da5ed64e17) Why not just use leaf index as nonce? ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/e6337107-ac93-4a3b-b83c-27213cb5133d) ## Followup tasks * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1029 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1194 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1329 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1407 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1408 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1409 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1410 * Future enhancement: The root rollup circuit could insert all messages at the very beginning of the root rollup circuit, so that txs within the rollup can refer to that state root and read L1>L2 messages immediately. * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1383 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1386 * We should implement subscription / polling methods for Aztec logs * We should maybe write rpc functions which allow calldata to be subscribed-to, keyed by tx_hash. * If a dapp wants to write a note from a public function, a lot of honus will be on a dapp developer to retain preimage information, query the blockchain, and derive the nonce. We should provide some examples to demonstrate this pattern.
superstar0402
added a commit
to superstar0402/aztec-nr
that referenced
this issue
Aug 16, 2024
# Description The way nonces work now, there can be inconsistencies in nonce assignment in the simulator vs the private kernel. Furthermore, you cannot know during function execution what the full set of commitments will be for the whole TX as some new commitments may be nullified and squashed. But we still want the ability to determine nonces and therefore uniqueNoteHashes from L1 calldata alone. I am sure I am not explaining all of the issues well enough, but it was determined that the current nonce paradigm will not work and therefore we must rework it. Rework nonces so that siloing by contract address happens first and uniqueness comes later. For now, nonces are injeced by the private ordering circuit (vs suggestion which was base rollup circuit). Pending notes and their reads have no nonces when processed in kernel. The public kernel (and therefore all commitments created in public functions) does not use nonces. Here was Mike's proposal for the rework: ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/7b20c886-1e92-452c-a886-c3da5ed64e17) Why not just use leaf index as nonce? ![image](https://github.com/AztecProtocol/aztec-packages/assets/47112877/e6337107-ac93-4a3b-b83c-27213cb5133d) ## Followup tasks * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1029 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1194 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1329 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1407 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1408 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1409 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1410 * Future enhancement: The root rollup circuit could insert all messages at the very beginning of the root rollup circuit, so that txs within the rollup can refer to that state root and read L1>L2 messages immediately. * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1383 * AztecProtocol/aztec-packages#1386 * We should implement subscription / polling methods for Aztec logs * We should maybe write rpc functions which allow calldata to be subscribed-to, keyed by tx_hash. * If a dapp wants to write a note from a public function, a lot of honus will be on a dapp developer to retain preimage information, query the blockchain, and derive the nonce. We should provide some examples to demonstrate this pattern.
@LeilaWang are we testing this? Would this still be a useful test? |
There are tests in noir to make sure that read requests can only be verified if it exists in the tree or in the pending set. I am not sure if we need a test that spans a bigger scope involving the oracle? |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
"We should add tests to ensure that an oracle which maliciously returns a note_header.nonce = 0 for a 'pre-existing note' results in a failing tx, because the resulting nullifier would be different from the 'correct' nullifier. Presumably the tx would correctly fail, either because the read request would result in a note which doesn't exist in the tree, or because the read request's note would look like a 'pending note', but there wouldn't be a corresponding earlier function which created such a pending note.
Not sure where in the stack such a test should be orchestrated?" - @iAmMichaelConnor
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: