bug(PXE): Transaction simulation should agree with inclusion if on same state #4781
Assignees
Labels
A-internal-devex
Area: Relates to the devex of internal teams building Aztec.
T-bug
Type: Bug. Something is broken.
Comments
LHerskind
added
T-bug
LHerskind
changed the title
LHerskind
changed the title
LHerskind
changed the title
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 9, 2024
…on fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781.
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 12, 2024
…on fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781.
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 12, 2024
…on fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781.
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 13, 2024
…on fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781.
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 13, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 13, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 18, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 26, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 27, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 28, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 29, 2024
fix: fixing private voting by correctly throwing an error if simulation fails (#7840) This PR makes a simulation of a tx fail, if the tx cannot be included in a block and added to the state. e.g. If a simulation produces duplicate nullifiers, or nullifiers that already exist in a state tree, the results of this simulation should not be returned, but should warn users that the transaction simulated is impossible to actually be added to a block due to being an invalid transaction. The method for achieving the above is that a new API on the node was created, used for validating the correctness of the metadata and side-effects produced by a transaction. A transaction is deemed valid if and only if the transaction can be added to a block that can be used to advance state. Note: this update does not make this validation necessary, and defaults to offline simulation. Offline simulation is previous non-validated behavior, and is potentially useful if we ever move to a model where a node is optional to a pxe. Another note just for reference: there is weirdness in e2e_prover, that fails the proof validation. Resolves #4781. Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
sklppy88
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 30, 2024
…#7951) Part of #4781 by having parity between sequencer tx validation and node tx validation. Note that we are using the validators from the sequencer, and they should match. We are omitting `phases` and `gas` tx validator which is in the sequencer and not here is because those tx validators are customizable by the sequencer and not uniform between all sequencers. --------- Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
codygunton
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Aug 30, 2024
…#7951) Part of #4781 by having parity between sequencer tx validation and node tx validation. Note that we are using the validators from the sequencer, and they should match. We are omitting `phases` and `gas` tx validator which is in the sequencer and not here is because those tx validators are customizable by the sequencer and not uniform between all sequencers. --------- Co-authored-by: Nicolás Venturo <[email protected]>
|
Completed via #7951 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Currently, the
simulationof a transaction can produce multiple of the same nullifiers without causing the simulation to fail, even though it would be impossible to actually include in a block.The simulation of transaction
Ton stateSshould only pass if the transactionTcan actually be added on stateSas part of a block as well.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: