types: Fix PolicyTypeUnlockConditions validation #176
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The old implementation was broken, as evidenced by the test cases I added. Specifically, we were implementing this policy in terms of
PolicyThreshold, butPolicyThresholdrequires you to mask any unused public keys withPolicyOpaque, whichPolicyTypeUnlockConditionscan't do. We also now handle algorithms other thanSpecifierEd25519correctly. Overall, this brings validation into agreement withconsensus.validateSignatures. We can't match its behavior exactly (because v1 transactions contain a list signatures that target specific inputs, while v2 transaction inputs carry their signatures with them), but that's fine; we just need to ensure that anyUnlockConditionsthat were satisfiable in v1 are also satisfiable in v2.