27aefac42505e9c083fa131d3d7edbec7803f3c0 validation: detect witness stripping without re-running Script checks (Antoine Poinsot)
2907b58834ab011f7dd0c42d323e440abd227c25 policy: introduce a helper to detect whether a transaction spends Segwit outputs (Antoine Poinsot)
eb073209db9efdbc2c94bc1f535a27ec6b20d954 qa: test witness stripping in p2p_segwit (Antoine Poinsot)
Pull request description:
Since it was introduced in 4eb515574e (#18044), the detection of a stripped witness relies on running the Script checks 3 times. In the worst case, this consists in running Script validation for every single input 3 times.
Detection of a stripped witness is necessary because in this case wtxid==txid, and the transaction's wtxid must not be added to the reject filter or it could allow a malicious peer to interfere with txid-based orphan resolution as used in 1p1c package relay.
However it is not necessary to run Script validation to detect a stripped witness (much less so doing it 3 times in a row). There are 3 types of witness program: defined program types (Taproot, P2WPKH and P2WSH), undefined types, and the Pay-to-anchor carve-out.
For defined program types, Script validation with an empty witness will always fail (by consensus). For undefined program types, Script validation is always going to fail regardless of the witness (by standardness). For P2A, an empty witness is never going to lead to a failure.
Therefore it holds that we can always detect a stripped witness without re-running Script validation. However this might lead to more "false positives" (cases where we return witness stripping for an otherwise invalid transaction) than the existing implementation. For instance a transaction with one P2PKH input with an invalid signature and one P2WPKH input with its witness stripped. The existing implementation would treat it as consensus invalid while the implementation in this PR would always consider it witness stripped.
h/t AJ: this essentially implements a variant of https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/33066#issuecomment-3135258539.
ACKs for top commit:
sipa:
re-ACK 27aefac42505e9c083fa131d3d7edbec7803f3c0
Crypt-iQ:
re-ACK 27aefac42505e9c083fa131d3d7edbec7803f3c0
glozow:
reACK 27aefac42505e9c083fa131d3d7edbec7803f3c0
Tree-SHA512: 70cf76b655b52bc8fa2759133315a3f11140844b6b80d9de3c95f592050978cc01a87bd2446e3a9c25cc872efea7659d6da3337b1a709511771fece206e9f149
* test: add test for unblinded re/issuance greater than 21 million
Co-authored-by: Mihailo Milenkovic <mihailo.milenkovic84@gmail.com>
* fix: unblinded re/issuance for greater than 21 million
Co-authored-by: Mihailo Milenkovic <mihailo.milenkovic84@gmail.com>
* enable with param config
* change range check to policy with config option
* refactoring, additional error messages and test extension
---------
Co-authored-by: Mihailo Milenkovic <mihailo.milenkovic84@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Tom Trevethan <ttrevethan@blockstream.com>
5fd4836019 init: change shutdown order of load block thread and scheduler (Martin Zumsande)
Pull request description:
This avoids situations during a reindex, in which the shutdown doesn't finish since `LimitValidationInterfaceQueue()` is called by the load block thread when the scheduler is already stopped, in which case it would block indefinitely. This can lead to intermittent failures in `feature_reindex.py` (#30424), which I could locally reproduce with
```diff
diff --git a/src/validation.cpp b/src/validation.cpp
index 74f0e4975c..be1706fdaf 100644
--- a/src/validation.cpp
+++ b/src/validation.cpp
@@ -3446,6 +3446,7 @@ static void LimitValidationInterfaceQueue(ValidationSignals& signals) LOCKS_EXCL
AssertLockNotHeld(cs_main);
if (signals.CallbacksPending() > 10) {
+ std::this_thread::sleep_for(std::chrono::milliseconds(50));
signals.SyncWithValidationInterfaceQueue();
}
}
```
It has also been reported by users running `reindex-chainstate` (#23234).
I thought for a bit about potential downsides of changing this order, but couldn't find any.
Fixes#30424Fixes#23234
ACKs for top commit:
maflcko:
review ACK 5fd4836019
hebasto:
re-ACK 5fd4836019.
tdb3:
ACK 5fd4836019
BrandonOdiwuor:
Code Review ACK 5fd4836019
Tree-SHA512: 3b8894e99551c5d4392b55eaa718eee05841a7287aeef2978699e1d633d5234399fa2f5a3e71eac1508d97845906bd33e0e63e5351855139e7be04c421359b36
7cb9367157 rpc: keep .cookie if it was not generated (Roman Zeyde)
Pull request description:
Otherwise, starting bitcoind twice may cause the `.cookie` file generated by the first instance to be deleted by the second instance shutdown (after failing to obtain a lock).
ACKs for top commit:
willcl-ark:
re-ACK 7cb9367157
achow101:
ACK 7cb9367157
kristapsk:
re-ACK 7cb9367157
stickies-v:
ACK 7cb9367157
Tree-SHA512: 0960dbc457975b0e0535f3d814824a879d7f85c9f1191537415b3fc253429a316a8e4badde56c8bc139778f132392983cec5fbe03891fb15ff61d3bc3f6e681b
This test would cause a crash in bitcoind (see #26274) if the fix given in the
previous commit was not applied.
Github-Pull: #26275
Rebased-From: 9153ff3e27
The external input test with specifying input weight would make a
pessimistic estimate of the input weight. However this would result in a
test failure as it is sometimes too pessimistic when an ECDSA signature
ends up being smaller than usual. To correct this, we can calculate the
input weight more accurately.
Github-Pull: #24454
Rebased-From: 8a04a386f7
