Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(x/accounts): check for overflows in multisig weights and votes #20384

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
May 21, 2024

Conversation

facundomedica
Copy link
Member

@facundomedica facundomedica commented May 14, 2024

Description

Closes: #20362


Author Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note to the item if the item is not applicable and
please add links to any relevant follow up issues.

I have...

  • included the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed ! in the type prefix if API or client breaking change
  • targeted the correct branch (see PR Targeting)
  • provided a link to the relevant issue or specification
  • reviewed "Files changed" and left comments if necessary
  • included the necessary unit and integration tests
  • added a changelog entry to CHANGELOG.md
  • updated the relevant documentation or specification, including comments for documenting Go code
  • confirmed all CI checks have passed

Reviewers Checklist

All items are required. Please add a note if the item is not applicable and please add
your handle next to the items reviewed if you only reviewed selected items.

I have...

  • confirmed the correct type prefix in the PR title
  • confirmed all author checklist items have been addressed
  • reviewed state machine logic, API design and naming, documentation is accurate, tests and test coverage

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Enhanced error handling for weight calculations in account initialization and proposal execution to prevent overflow issues.
  • Bug Fixes

    • Improved reliability of weight calculations in various account operations by using a new safe addition method.
  • Tests

    • Added new tests to ensure robust handling of weight overflow scenarios.

Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented May 14, 2024

Walkthrough

Walkthrough

The recent changes introduce a safeAdd function to prevent overflow issues when summing weights in multisig accounts. This function is now used in the Init, ExecuteProposal, and UpdateConfig methods to ensure safe addition of weights. Additionally, a new test for weight overflow scenarios has been added.

Changes

Files Change Summary
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go Updated Init and ExecuteProposal methods to use safeAdd for weight calculations. Added safeAdd function.
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go Added TestWeightOverflow to test for weight overflow scenarios. Imported math package.
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go Modified UpdateConfig method to use safeAdd for calculating totalWeight.

Assessment against linked issues

Objective (Issue #20362) Addressed Explanation
Prevent overflow in multisig accounts during Init and UpdateConfig
Implement safe addition of weights in relevant methods
Add tests for weight overflow scenarios

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger a review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Additionally, you can add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.

CodeRabbit Configration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

@facundomedica facundomedica marked this pull request as ready for review May 14, 2024 15:12
@facundomedica facundomedica requested a review from a team as a code owner May 14, 2024 15:12
Copy link
Contributor

@facundomedica your pull request is missing a changelog!

@facundomedica
Copy link
Member Author

@facundomedica your pull request is missing a changelog!

No need for a changelog, this hasn't been released yet

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between fbc61d2 and 96289d8.
Files selected for processing (2)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go (3 hunks)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go (2 hunks)
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (2)
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go (1)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.

x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go (2)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.


Pattern **/*_test.go: "Assess the unit test code assessing sufficient code coverage for the changes associated in the pull request"

Additional comments not posted (5)
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go (4)

94-97: Overflow check added to totalWeight calculation.


272-285: Overflow check added to vote tally calculations.


293-296: Overflow check added to totalWeight calculation.


407-416: New function safeAdd added for safe addition with overflow checks.

x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go (1)

663-691: New test function TestWeightOverflow added to verify handling of weight overflow scenarios.

var sum uint64
for _, num := range nums {
if sum+num < sum {
return 0, errors.New("overflow")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

should we set it to max instead? that way tallying will see the max number not 0. 0 could signify 0 votes and passing here now

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If an error is returned we don't really care about the result, as we'll return it without continuing execution

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Makes sense. Does it make sense to check if all weight equate to less than maxuint64 when adding memebers or creating the multisig

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm doing that check here: https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/pull/20384/files#diff-fdd6d41c43d4db2fca28c5b410bd647692b4f7fb78997c62abf0835c8052d9c6R94 but now I that I've double-check I'm not doing that on update config.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Q: why can't we simply ensure that total_weight <= math.Uint64Max at member lvl

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@testinginprod can you explain a bit more? You mean that we should only check for overflow when creating/updating members? That sounds good, because then in the tally we'd never go over that

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Good thinking. Checks on init/ update would be enough but tally seems not to be on the criticial path for performance so I would not mind safety over performance.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done, I've removed the check on tally and added the test on update

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 1

Out of diff range and nitpick comments (1)
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go (1)

Line range hint 70-72: Clarify error message for zero values.

The error message for zero values can be more specific to indicate which values are zero.

-		return errors.New("threshold, quorum and voting period must be greater than zero")
+		return errors.New("threshold, quorum, and voting period must all be greater than zero")
Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 96289d8 and 00f8d18.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go (1 hunks)
Additional Context Used
Path-based Instructions (1)
x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go (1)

Pattern **/*.go: Review the Golang code for conformity with the Uber Golang style guide, highlighting any deviations.

x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
func safeAdd(nums ...uint64) (uint64, error) {
var sum uint64
for _, num := range nums {
if sum+num < sum {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

minor nit, i would pefer sum > math.MaxUint64 - num for easier readability

Copy link
Member

@sontrinh16 sontrinh16 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 00f8d18 and f800a92.
Files selected for processing (1)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/update_config.go

Copy link
Contributor

@alpe alpe left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the updates. The changes look good for me and solve the problem. ⛵
👮‍♂️ Please add a test to ensure the update process is covered as well. This will help with regression and future updates.

@@ -313,6 +313,29 @@ func TestUpdateConfig(t *testing.T) {
},
},
},
{
"change members, invalid weights",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

very nice! 👍

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Review Details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits Files that changed from the base of the PR and between f800a92 and 3350270.
Files selected for processing (2)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go (3 hunks)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go (3 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (2)
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account.go
  • x/accounts/defaults/multisig/account_test.go

@facundomedica facundomedica added this pull request to the merge queue May 21, 2024
Merged via the queue into main with commit a2dd2a0 May 21, 2024
68 checks passed
@facundomedica facundomedica deleted the facu/fix-20362 branch May 21, 2024 09:44
alpe added a commit that referenced this pull request May 23, 2024
* main: (95 commits)
  fix(x/accounts): check for overflows in multisig weights and votes (#20384)
  docs(x/account/auth): Improve error handling and comments in fee.go (#20426)
  docs: fix some markdown syntax (#20432)
  revert: bank change module to account change (#20427)
  fix: nil pointer panic when store don't exists in historical version (#20425)
  fix(store/v2): Remove should not error on miss (#20423)
  chore: upstream more changes from v2 (#20387)
  docs(x/auth/ante): fixed typo  in TxWithTimeoutHeight interface name (#20418)
  fix: avoid default sendenabled for module accounts (#20419)
  docs(x/auth): fixed typo in command example for multisign transaction (#20417)
  build(deps): Bump bufbuild/buf-setup-action from 1.31.0 to 1.32.0 (#20413)
  build(deps): Bump github.com/hashicorp/go-plugin from 1.6.0 to 1.6.1 in /store (#20414)
  feat(x/accounts): Add schema caching feature and corresponding test case (#20055)
  refactor(runtime/v2): remove dependency on sdk (#20389)
  refactor!: turn MsgsV2 into ReflectMessages to make it less confusing (#19839)
  docs: Enhanced the ParsePagination method documentation (#20385)
  refactor(runtime,core): split router service (#20401)
  chore: fix spelling errors (#20400)
  docs: Documented error handling in OfferSnapshot method (#20380)
  build(deps): Bump google.golang.org/grpc from 1.63.2 to 1.64.0 (#20390)
  ...
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: Prevent overflow in multisig accounts
5 participants