feat: allow governance to update the TrustingPeriod of the 07-tenderm…

…int light client (backport cosmos#1713) (cosmos#1761)

* feat: allow governance to update the TrustingPeriod of the 07-tendermint light client (cosmos#1713)

* initial commit

* format imports

* update docs

* update CHANGELOG

* update upgrade dev docs

* update re: pr comments

(cherry picked from commit c12789d)

* position correctly changelog entry

Co-authored-by: Charly <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Carlos Rodriguez <[email protected]>

docs/architecture/adr-026-ibc-client-recovery-mechanisms.md

@@ -7,6 +7,7 @@
 - 2021/01/15: Revision to support substitute clients for unfreezing
 - 2021/05/20: Revision to simplify consensus state copying, remove initial height
 - 2022/04/08: Revision to deprecate AllowUpdateAfterExpiry and AllowUpdateAfterMisbehaviour
+- 2022/07/15: Revision to allow updating of TrustingPeriod
 
 ## Status
 
@@ -51,6 +52,9 @@ We elect not to deal with chains which have actually halted, which is necessaril
 
     Previously, `AllowUpdateAfterExpiry` and `AllowUpdateAfterMisbehaviour` were used to signal the recovery options for an expired or frozen client, and governance proposals were not allowed to overwrite the client if these parameters were set to false. However, this has now been deprecated because a code migration can overwrite the client and consensus states regardless of the value of these parameters. If governance would vote to overwrite a client or consensus state, it is likely that governance would also be willing to perform a code migration to do the same.
 
+    In addition, `TrustingPeriod` was initally not allowed to be updated by a client upgrade proposal. However, due to the number of situations experienced in production where the `TrustingPeriod` of a client should be allowed to be updated because of ie: initial misconfiguration for a canonical channel, governance should be allowed to update this client parameter. 
+
+    Note that this should NOT be lightly updated, as there may be a gap in time between when misbehaviour has occured and when the evidence of misbehaviour is submitted. For example, if the `UnbondingPeriod` is 2 weeks and the `TrustingPeriod` has also been set to two weeks, a validator could wait until right before `UnbondingPeriod` finishes, submit false information, then unbond and exit without being slashed for misbehaviour. Therefore, we recommend that the trusting period for the 07-tendermint client be set to 2/3 of the `UnbondingPeriod`.
 
 Note that clients frozen due to misbehaviour must wait for the evidence to expire to avoid becoming refrozen. 
 

docs/ibc/upgrades/developer-guide.md

@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@ Developers must ensure that the new client adopts all of the new Client paramete
 
 Upgrades must adhere to the IBC Security Model. IBC does not rely on the assumption of honest relayers for correctness. Thus users should not have to rely on relayers to maintain client correctness and security (though honest relayers must exist to maintain relayer liveness). While relayers may choose any set of client parameters while creating a new `ClientState`, this still holds under the security model since users can always choose a relayer-created client that suits their security and correctness needs or create a Client with their desired parameters if no such client exists.
 
-However, when upgrading an existing client, one must keep in mind that there are already many users who depend on this client's particular parameters. We cannot give the upgrading relayer free choice over these parameters once they have already been chosen. This would violate the security model since users who rely on the client would have to rely on the upgrading relayer to maintain the same level of security. Thus, developers must make sure that their upgrade mechanism allows clients to upgrade the chain-specified parameters whenever a chain upgrade changes these parameters (examples in the Tendermint client include `UnbondingPeriod`, `ChainID`, `UpgradePath`, etc.), while ensuring that the relayer submitting the `UpgradeClientMsg` cannot alter the client-chosen parameters that the users are relying upon (examples in Tendermint client include `TrustingPeriod`, `TrustLevel`, `MaxClockDrift`, etc).
+However, when upgrading an existing client, one must keep in mind that there are already many users who depend on this client's particular parameters. We cannot give the upgrading relayer free choice over these parameters once they have already been chosen. This would violate the security model since users who rely on the client would have to rely on the upgrading relayer to maintain the same level of security. Thus, developers must make sure that their upgrade mechanism allows clients to upgrade the chain-specified parameters whenever a chain upgrade changes these parameters (examples in the Tendermint client include `UnbondingPeriod`, `TrustingPeriod`, `ChainID`, `UpgradePath`, etc.), while ensuring that the relayer submitting the `UpgradeClientMsg` cannot alter the client-chosen parameters that the users are relying upon (examples in Tendermint client include `TrustLevel`, `MaxClockDrift`, etc).
 
 Developers should maintain the distinction between Client parameters that are uniform across every valid light client of a chain (chain-chosen parameters), and Client parameters that are customizable by each individual client (client-chosen parameters); since this distinction is necessary to implement the `ZeroCustomFields` method in the `ClientState` interface:
 

modules/light-clients/99-ostracon/types/proposal_handle.go

@@ -2,6 +2,7 @@ package types
 
 import (
 	"reflect"
+	"time"
 
 	"github.com/line/lbm-sdk/codec"
 	sdk "github.com/line/lbm-sdk/types"
@@ -70,20 +71,25 @@ func (cs ClientState) CheckSubstituteAndUpdateState(
 	cs.LatestHeight = substituteClientState.LatestHeight
 	cs.ChainId = substituteClientState.ChainId
 
+	// set new trusting period based on the substitute client state
+	cs.TrustingPeriod = substituteClientState.TrustingPeriod
+
 	// no validation is necessary since the substitute is verified to be Active
 	// in 02-client.
 
 	return &cs, nil
 }
 
 // IsMatchingClientState returns true if all the client state parameters match
-// except for frozen height, latest height, and chain-id.
+// except for frozen height, latest height, trusting period, chain-id.
 func IsMatchingClientState(subject, substitute ClientState) bool {
 	// zero out parameters which do not need to match
 	subject.LatestHeight = clienttypes.ZeroHeight()
 	subject.FrozenHeight = clienttypes.ZeroHeight()
+	subject.TrustingPeriod = time.Duration(0)
 	substitute.LatestHeight = clienttypes.ZeroHeight()
 	substitute.FrozenHeight = clienttypes.ZeroHeight()
+	substitute.TrustingPeriod = time.Duration(0)
 	subject.ChainId = ""
 	substitute.ChainId = ""
 	// sets both sets of flags to true as these flags have been DEPRECATED, see ADR-026 for more information

modules/light-clients/99-ostracon/types/proposal_handle_test.go

@@ -145,6 +145,8 @@ func (suite *OstraconTestSuite) TestCheckSubstituteAndUpdateState() {
 			substitutePath := ibctesting.NewPath(suite.chainA, suite.chainB)
 			suite.coordinator.SetupClients(substitutePath)
 			substituteClientState := suite.chainA.GetClientState(substitutePath.EndpointA.ClientID).(*types.ClientState)
+			// update trusting period of substitute client state
+			substituteClientState.TrustingPeriod = time.Hour * 24 * 7
 			suite.chainA.App.GetIBCKeeper().ClientKeeper.SetClientState(suite.chainA.GetContext(), substitutePath.EndpointA.ClientID, substituteClientState)
 
 			// update substitute a few times
@@ -195,6 +197,7 @@ func (suite *OstraconTestSuite) TestCheckSubstituteAndUpdateState() {
 				suite.Require().Equal(expectedIterationKey, subjectIterationKey)
 
 				suite.Require().Equal(newChainID, updatedClient.(*types.ClientState).ChainId)
+				suite.Require().Equal(time.Hour*24*7, updatedClient.(*types.ClientState).TrustingPeriod)
 			} else {
 				suite.Require().Error(err)
 				suite.Require().Nil(updatedClient)
@@ -240,9 +243,15 @@ func (suite *OstraconTestSuite) TestIsMatchingClientState() {
 			}, true,
 		},
 		{
-			"not matching, trusting period is different", func() {
+			"matching, trusting period is different", func() {
 				subjectClientState.TrustingPeriod = time.Duration(time.Hour * 10)
 				substituteClientState.TrustingPeriod = time.Duration(time.Hour * 1)
+			}, true,
+		},
+		{
+			"not matching, trust level is different", func() {
+				subjectClientState.TrustLevel = types.Fraction{2, 3}
+				substituteClientState.TrustLevel = types.Fraction{1, 3}
 			}, false,
 		},
 	}