You can not select more than 25 topics Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
 
 
 
 
 
 

267 lines
10 KiB

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
}