TicketSequence with non-zero Sequence is an error:

Before this change any non-zero Sequence field was handled as
a non-ticketed transaction, even if a TicketSequence was
present.  We learned that this could lead to user confusion.
So the rules are tightened up.

Now if any transaction contains both a non-zero Sequence
field and a TicketSequence field then that transaction
returns a temSEQ_AND_TICKET error code.

The (deprecated) "sign" and "submit" RPC commands are tuned
up so they auto-insert a Sequence field of zero if they see
a TicketSequence in the transaction.

No amendment is needed because this change is going into
the first release that supports the TicketBatch amendment.
This commit is contained in:
Scott Schurr
2021-02-09 10:33:06 -08:00
committed by manojsdoshi
parent c138338358
commit a2e1a7a84d
5 changed files with 190 additions and 15 deletions

View File

@@ -57,7 +57,7 @@ preflight1(PreflightContext const& ctx)
{
// This is inappropriate in preflight0, because only Change transactions
// skip this function, and those do not allow an sfTicketSequence field.
if (ctx.tx.getSeqProxy().isTicket() &&
if (ctx.tx.isFieldPresent(sfTicketSequence) &&
!ctx.rules.enabled(featureTicketBatch))
{
return temMALFORMED;
@@ -254,18 +254,29 @@ Transactor::checkSeqProxy(
SeqProxy const t_seqProx = tx.getSeqProxy();
SeqProxy const a_seq = SeqProxy::sequence((*sle)[sfSequence]);
if (t_seqProx.isSeq() && t_seqProx != a_seq)
if (t_seqProx.isSeq())
{
if (a_seq < t_seqProx)
if (tx.isFieldPresent(sfTicketSequence) &&
view.rules().enabled(featureTicketBatch))
{
JLOG(j.trace()) << "applyTransaction: has future sequence number "
<< "a_seq=" << a_seq << " t_seq=" << t_seqProx;
return terPRE_SEQ;
JLOG(j.trace()) << "applyTransaction: has both a TicketSequence "
"and a non-zero Sequence number";
return temSEQ_AND_TICKET;
}
if (t_seqProx != a_seq)
{
if (a_seq < t_seqProx)
{
JLOG(j.trace())
<< "applyTransaction: has future sequence number "
<< "a_seq=" << a_seq << " t_seq=" << t_seqProx;
return terPRE_SEQ;
}
// It's an already-used sequence number.
JLOG(j.trace()) << "applyTransaction: has past sequence number "
<< "a_seq=" << a_seq << " t_seq=" << t_seqProx;
return tefPAST_SEQ;
}
// It's an already-used sequence number.
JLOG(j.trace()) << "applyTransaction: has past sequence number "
<< "a_seq=" << a_seq << " t_seq=" << t_seqProx;
return tefPAST_SEQ;
}
else if (t_seqProx.isTicket())
{

View File

@@ -115,9 +115,10 @@ enum TEMcodes : TERUnderlyingType {
temCANNOT_PREAUTH_SELF,
temINVALID_COUNT,
// An intermediate result used internally, should never be returned.
temUNCERTAIN,
temUNKNOWN,
temUNCERTAIN, // An internal intermediate result; should never be returned.
temUNKNOWN, // An internal intermediate result; should never be returned.
temSEQ_AND_TICKET,
};
//------------------------------------------------------------------------------

View File

@@ -152,6 +152,7 @@ transResults()
MAKE_ERROR(temINVALID_ACCOUNT_ID, "Malformed: A field contains an invalid account ID."),
MAKE_ERROR(temCANNOT_PREAUTH_SELF, "Malformed: An account may not preauthorize itself."),
MAKE_ERROR(temINVALID_COUNT, "Malformed: Count field outside valid range."),
MAKE_ERROR(temSEQ_AND_TICKET, "Transaction contains a TicketSequence and a non-zero Sequence."),
MAKE_ERROR(terRETRY, "Retry transaction."),
MAKE_ERROR(terFUNDS_SPENT, "DEPRECATED."),

View File

@@ -441,7 +441,9 @@ transactionPreProcessImpl(
{
if (!tx_json.isMember(jss::Sequence))
{
if (!sle)
bool const hasTicketSeq =
tx_json.isMember(sfTicketSequence.jsonName);
if (!hasTicketSeq && !sle)
{
JLOG(j.debug())
<< "transactionSign: Failed to find source account "
@@ -449,7 +451,8 @@ transactionPreProcessImpl(
return rpcError(rpcSRC_ACT_NOT_FOUND);
}
tx_json[jss::Sequence] = app.getTxQ().nextQueuableSeq(sle).value();
tx_json[jss::Sequence] =
hasTicketSeq ? 0 : app.getTxQ().nextQueuableSeq(sle).value();
}
if (!tx_json.isMember(jss::Flags))