package evidence import ( "bytes" "errors" "fmt" "time" "github.com/tendermint/tendermint/light" "github.com/tendermint/tendermint/types" ) // verify verifies the evidence fully by checking: // - It has not already been committed // - it is sufficiently recent (MaxAge) // - it is from a key who was a validator at the given height // - it is internally consistent with state // - it was properly signed by the alleged equivocator and meets the individual evidence verification requirements // // NOTE: Evidence may be provided that we do not have the block or validator // set for. In these cases, we do not return a ErrInvalidEvidence as not to have // the sending peer disconnect. All other errors are treated as invalid evidence // (i.e. ErrInvalidEvidence). func (evpool *Pool) verify(evidence types.Evidence) error { var ( state = evpool.State() height = state.LastBlockHeight evidenceParams = state.ConsensusParams.Evidence ageNumBlocks = height - evidence.Height() ) // ensure we have the block for the evidence height // // NOTE: It is currently possible for a peer to send us evidence we're not // able to process because we're too far behind (e.g. syncing), so we DO NOT // return an invalid evidence error because we do not want the peer to // disconnect or signal an error in this particular case. blockMeta := evpool.blockStore.LoadBlockMeta(evidence.Height()) if blockMeta == nil { return fmt.Errorf("failed to verify evidence; missing block for height %d", evidence.Height()) } // verify the time of the evidence evTime := blockMeta.Header.Time ageDuration := state.LastBlockTime.Sub(evTime) // check that the evidence hasn't expired if ageDuration > evidenceParams.MaxAgeDuration && ageNumBlocks > evidenceParams.MaxAgeNumBlocks { return types.NewErrInvalidEvidence( evidence, fmt.Errorf( "evidence from height %d (created at: %v) is too old; min height is %d and evidence can not be older than %v", evidence.Height(), evTime, height-evidenceParams.MaxAgeNumBlocks, state.LastBlockTime.Add(evidenceParams.MaxAgeDuration), ), ) } // apply the evidence-specific verification logic switch ev := evidence.(type) { case *types.DuplicateVoteEvidence: valSet, err := evpool.stateDB.LoadValidators(evidence.Height()) if err != nil { return err } if err := VerifyDuplicateVote(ev, state.ChainID, valSet); err != nil { return types.NewErrInvalidEvidence(evidence, err) } _, val := valSet.GetByAddress(ev.VoteA.ValidatorAddress) if err := ev.ValidateABCI(val, valSet, evTime); err != nil { ev.GenerateABCI(val, valSet, evTime) if addErr := evpool.addPendingEvidence(ev); addErr != nil { evpool.logger.Error("adding pending duplicate vote evidence failed", "err", addErr) } return err } return nil case *types.LightClientAttackEvidence: commonHeader, err := getSignedHeader(evpool.blockStore, evidence.Height()) if err != nil { return err } commonVals, err := evpool.stateDB.LoadValidators(evidence.Height()) if err != nil { return err } trustedHeader := commonHeader // in the case of lunatic the trusted header is different to the common header if evidence.Height() != ev.ConflictingBlock.Height { trustedHeader, err = getSignedHeader(evpool.blockStore, ev.ConflictingBlock.Height) if err != nil { // FIXME: This multi step process is a bit unergonomic. We may want to consider a more efficient process // that doesn't require as much io and is atomic. // If the node doesn't have a block at the height of the conflicting block, then this could be // a forward lunatic attack. Thus the node must get the latest height it has latestHeight := evpool.blockStore.Height() trustedHeader, err = getSignedHeader(evpool.blockStore, latestHeight) if err != nil { return err } if trustedHeader.Time.Before(ev.ConflictingBlock.Time) { return fmt.Errorf("latest block time (%v) is before conflicting block time (%v)", trustedHeader.Time, ev.ConflictingBlock.Time, ) } } } err = VerifyLightClientAttack( ev, commonHeader, trustedHeader, commonVals, state.LastBlockTime, state.ConsensusParams.Evidence.MaxAgeDuration, ) if err != nil { return types.NewErrInvalidEvidence(evidence, err) } // validate the ABCI component of evidence. If this fails but the rest // is valid then we regenerate the ABCI component, save the rectified // evidence and return an error if err := ev.ValidateABCI(commonVals, trustedHeader, evTime); err != nil { ev.GenerateABCI(commonVals, trustedHeader, evTime) if addErr := evpool.addPendingEvidence(ev); addErr != nil { evpool.logger.Error("adding pending light client attack evidence failed", "err", addErr) } return err } return nil default: return types.NewErrInvalidEvidence(evidence, fmt.Errorf("unrecognized evidence type: %T", evidence)) } } // VerifyLightClientAttack verifies LightClientAttackEvidence against the state of the full node. This involves // the following checks: // - the common header from the full node has at least 1/3 voting power which is also present in // the conflicting header's commit // - 2/3+ of the conflicting validator set correctly signed the conflicting block // - the nodes trusted header at the same height as the conflicting header has a different hash // // CONTRACT: must run ValidateBasic() on the evidence before verifying // must check that the evidence has not expired (i.e. is outside the maximum age threshold) func VerifyLightClientAttack(e *types.LightClientAttackEvidence, commonHeader, trustedHeader *types.SignedHeader, commonVals *types.ValidatorSet, now time.Time, trustPeriod time.Duration) error { // In the case of lunatic attack there will be a different commonHeader height. Therefore the node perform a single // verification jump between the common header and the conflicting one if commonHeader.Height != e.ConflictingBlock.Height { err := commonVals.VerifyCommitLightTrusting(trustedHeader.ChainID, e.ConflictingBlock.Commit, light.DefaultTrustLevel) if err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("skipping verification of conflicting block failed: %w", err) } // In the case of equivocation and amnesia we expect all header hashes to be correctly derived } else if e.ConflictingHeaderIsInvalid(trustedHeader.Header) { return errors.New("common height is the same as conflicting block height so expected the conflicting" + " block to be correctly derived yet it wasn't") } // Verify that the 2/3+ commits from the conflicting validator set were for the conflicting header if err := e.ConflictingBlock.ValidatorSet.VerifyCommitLight(trustedHeader.ChainID, e.ConflictingBlock.Commit.BlockID, e.ConflictingBlock.Height, e.ConflictingBlock.Commit); err != nil { return fmt.Errorf("invalid commit from conflicting block: %w", err) } // check in the case of a forward lunatic attack that monotonically increasing time has been violated if e.ConflictingBlock.Height > trustedHeader.Height && e.ConflictingBlock.Time.After(trustedHeader.Time) { return fmt.Errorf("conflicting block doesn't violate monotonically increasing time (%v is after %v)", e.ConflictingBlock.Time, trustedHeader.Time, ) // In all other cases check that the hashes of the conflicting header and the trusted header are different } else if bytes.Equal(trustedHeader.Hash(), e.ConflictingBlock.Hash()) { return fmt.Errorf("trusted header hash matches the evidence's conflicting header hash: %X", trustedHeader.Hash()) } return nil } // VerifyDuplicateVote verifies DuplicateVoteEvidence against the state of full node. This involves the // following checks: // - the validator is in the validator set at the height of the evidence // - the height, round, type and validator address of the votes must be the same // - the block ID's must be different // - The signatures must both be valid func VerifyDuplicateVote(e *types.DuplicateVoteEvidence, chainID string, valSet *types.ValidatorSet) error { _, val := valSet.GetByAddress(e.VoteA.ValidatorAddress) if val == nil { return fmt.Errorf("address %X was not a validator at height %d", e.VoteA.ValidatorAddress, e.Height()) } pubKey := val.PubKey // H/R/S must be the same if e.VoteA.Height != e.VoteB.Height || e.VoteA.Round != e.VoteB.Round || e.VoteA.Type != e.VoteB.Type { return fmt.Errorf("h/r/s does not match: %d/%d/%v vs %d/%d/%v", e.VoteA.Height, e.VoteA.Round, e.VoteA.Type, e.VoteB.Height, e.VoteB.Round, e.VoteB.Type) } // Address must be the same if !bytes.Equal(e.VoteA.ValidatorAddress, e.VoteB.ValidatorAddress) { return fmt.Errorf("validator addresses do not match: %X vs %X", e.VoteA.ValidatorAddress, e.VoteB.ValidatorAddress, ) } // BlockIDs must be different if e.VoteA.BlockID.Equals(e.VoteB.BlockID) { return fmt.Errorf( "block IDs are the same (%v) - not a real duplicate vote", e.VoteA.BlockID, ) } // pubkey must match address (this should already be true, sanity check) addr := e.VoteA.ValidatorAddress if !bytes.Equal(pubKey.Address(), addr) { return fmt.Errorf("address (%X) doesn't match pubkey (%v - %X)", addr, pubKey, pubKey.Address()) } va := e.VoteA.ToProto() vb := e.VoteB.ToProto() // Signatures must be valid if !pubKey.VerifySignature(types.VoteSignBytes(chainID, va), e.VoteA.Signature) { return fmt.Errorf("verifying VoteA: %w", types.ErrVoteInvalidSignature) } if !pubKey.VerifySignature(types.VoteSignBytes(chainID, vb), e.VoteB.Signature) { return fmt.Errorf("verifying VoteB: %w", types.ErrVoteInvalidSignature) } return nil } func getSignedHeader(blockStore BlockStore, height int64) (*types.SignedHeader, error) { blockMeta := blockStore.LoadBlockMeta(height) if blockMeta == nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("don't have header at height #%d", height) } commit := blockStore.LoadBlockCommit(height) if commit == nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("don't have commit at height #%d", height) } return &types.SignedHeader{ Header: &blockMeta.Header, Commit: commit, }, nil }