discovery: enforce strict validation of peer gossip messages#10581
discovery: enforce strict validation of peer gossip messages#10581NishantBansal2003 wants to merge 2 commits intolightningnetwork:masterfrom
Conversation
Summary of ChangesHello @NishantBansal2003, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request significantly enhances the robustness of the gossip state machine by introducing strict validation for incoming peer gossip messages. Specifically, it ensures that Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Changelog
Activity
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This is a solid pull request that hardens the gossip message processing by adding strict validation for the chain hash in ReplyChannelRange, ReplyShortChanIDsEnd, and GossipTimestampRange messages. The defensive check for timestamp consistency in ReplyChannelRange is also a good addition for robustness.
The changes are well-implemented and follow existing patterns in the codebase. The refactoring to introduce processScidEndReply improves the structure of the channelGraphSyncer. The new tests for malformed messages are comprehensive and directly verify the new validation logic.
Overall, this is a high-quality contribution that improves the security and stability of the gossip syncer. I have no further recommendations.
b1b1dee to
2a2bcd7
Compare
|
@NishantBansal2003, remember to re-request review from reviewers when ready |
Signed-off-by: Nishant Bansal <nishant.bansal.282003@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Nishant Bansal <nishant.bansal.282003@gmail.com>
2a2bcd7 to
ebe15af
Compare
While fuzzing the gossip state machine, I found that LND does not validate the chain hash in
ReplyChannelRange,ReplyShortChanIDsEndandGossipTimestampRangemessages. It would be safer to enforce strict validation on these messages to prevent malformed responses from being processed. I verified that CLN performs chain hash validation for these message types.