Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Oct 20, 2023. It is now read-only.

Invalid message start in communication with Node #169

Closed
martin-key opened this issue Jan 12, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

Invalid message start in communication with Node #169

martin-key opened this issue Jan 12, 2018 · 9 comments
Labels

Comments

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor

martin-key commented Jan 12, 2018

2018-01-12 05:55:09 PROCESSMESSAGE: INVALID MESSAGESTART version peer=442992
2018-01-12 05:55:09 PROCESSMESSAGE: INVALID MESSAGESTART version peer=442993
2018-01-12 05:55:09 PROCESSMESSAGE: INVALID MESSAGESTART version peer=442994
2018-01-12 05:55:09 PROCESSMESSAGE: INVALID MESSAGESTART version peer=442995

This is what I've got from the logs. Also in BTG -
2018-01-12 05:55:08 ERROR: ProcessNewBlock: AcceptBlock FAILED currently looking for more info.

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

This happens on BTG core, version 0.15.0.2. It causes a lot of ping.

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

After investigation I found out that the traffic was caused by 2 IPs that were trying to reach the nodes. Is there a possibility that the pool somehow exposes information about the IPs of the coin daemons ? After blocking the IPs the traffic dropped 6 times .... I have no such problems on my other nodes and the 2 for the pool were made specially for the pool. Moreover upon changing the nodes I have seen on the graphs that the traffic rises where the pool is pointed.

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

The drop is when I have banned the IPs
screen shot 2018-01-12 at 12 30 05

@rterbush
Copy link
Contributor

These messages are caused by some "feature" of the BTG node software. Not clear if this change has yet to be implemented.

BTCGPU/BTCGPU#160

We should probably not be banning based on this warning.

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

I have removed the IPs causing this and had no such problem. Could be an attack. However this is not the explanation for this:
screen shot 2018-01-12 at 19 01 42

@oliverw
Copy link
Owner

oliverw commented Jan 12, 2018

@StarbuckBG Nope. The pool does not expose the daemons anywhere.

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

martin-key commented Jan 12, 2018 via email

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

martin-key commented Jan 12, 2018

The problem with the rejected blocks is fixed by this - f5bd439

Tested in private BTG regtest network and working. Seems that the BTC segwit block is ok, but please double check.

Fix is included my PR #157

@martin-key
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing for now.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants