Skip to content

Commit

Permalink
Add makefile auto download and sed on proto
Browse files Browse the repository at this point in the history
  • Loading branch information
@h5law
h5law committed Jul 21, 2023
1 parent 672e202 commit 7116016
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Showing 2 changed files with 117 additions and 81 deletions.
20 changes: 20 additions & 0 deletions Makefile
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -13,6 +13,15 @@ CWD ?= CURRENT_WORKING_DIRECTIONRY_NOT_SUPPLIED
# `VERBOSE_TEST="" make test_persistence` is an easy way to run the same tests without verbose output
VERBOSE_TEST ?= -v

# Detect OS using the $(shell uname -s) command
ifeq ($(shell uname -s),Darwin)
# Add macOS-specific commands here
SEDI = sed -i ''
else ifeq ($(shell uname -s),Linux)
# Add Linux-specific commands here
SEDI = sed -i
endif

.SILENT:

.PHONY: list ## List all make targets
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -309,13 +318,24 @@ protogen_local: go_protoc-go-inject-tag ## Generate go structures for all of the
$(PROTOC_SHARED) -I=./p2p/types/proto --go_out=./p2p/types ./p2p/types/proto/*.proto

# IBC
make copy_ics23_proto
$(PROTOC_SHARED) -I=./ibc/types/proto --go_out=./ibc/types ./ibc/types/proto/*.proto

# echo "View generated proto files by running: make protogen_show"

# CONSIDERATION: Some proto files contain unused gRPC services so we may need to add the following
# if/when we decide to include it: `grpc--go-grpc_opt=paths=source_relative --go-grpc_out=./output/path`

.PHONY: copy_ics23_proto
copy_ics23_proto:
echo "Downloading cosmos/ics23 proto definitions..."
curl -s -o ./ibc/types/proto/proofs.proto https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cosmos/ics23/master/proto/cosmos/ics23/v1/proofs.proto && \
$(SEDI) \
-e '/^package/{N;d;}' \
-e '[email protected]/.*"@github.com/pokt-network/ibc/types"@g' \
./ibc/types/proto/proofs.proto && \
awk 'BEGIN { print "// ===== !! THIS IS CLONED FROM cosmos/ics23 !! =====\n" } { print }' ./ibc/types/proto/proofs.proto > tmpfile && mv tmpfile ./ibc/types/proto/proofs.proto

.PHONY: protogen_docker_m1
## TECHDEBT: Test, validate & update.
protogen_docker_m1: docker_check
Expand Down
178 changes: 97 additions & 81 deletions ibc/types/proto/proofs.proto
View file
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -1,10 +1,8 @@
syntax = "proto3";
// ===== !! THIS IS CLONED FROM cosmos/ics23 !! =====

// This file is a clone from the github.com/cosmos/ics23 repo, it has been
// cloned to be compiled with protoc generic. As such it will produce valid
// protobuf messages that can be serialised and cloned
syntax = "proto3";

option go_package = "github.com/pokt-network/pocket/ibc/types";
option go_package = "github.com/pokt-network/ibc/types";

enum HashOp {
// NO_HASH is the default if no data passed. Note this is an illegal argument some places.
Expand All @@ -17,10 +15,12 @@ enum HashOp {
SHA512_256 = 6;
}

// LengthOp defines how to process the key and value of the LeafOp
// to include length information. After encoding the length with the given
// algorithm, the length will be prepended to the key and value bytes.
// (Each one with it's own encoded length)
/**
LengthOp defines how to process the key and value of the LeafOp
to include length information. After encoding the length with the given
algorithm, the length will be prepended to the key and value bytes.
(Each one with it's own encoded length)
*/
enum LengthOp {
// NO_PREFIX don't include any length info
NO_PREFIX = 0;
Expand All @@ -42,42 +42,48 @@ enum LengthOp {
REQUIRE_64_BYTES = 8;
}

// ExistenceProof takes a key and a value and a set of steps to perform on it.
// The result of peforming all these steps will provide a "root hash", which can
// be compared to the value in a header.
//
// Since it is computationally infeasible to produce a hash collission for any of the used
// cryptographic hash functions, if someone can provide a series of operations to transform
// a given key and value into a root hash that matches some trusted root, these key and values
// must be in the referenced merkle tree.
//
// The only possible issue is maliablity in LeafOp, such as providing extra prefix data,
// which should be controlled by a spec. Eg. with lengthOp as NONE,
// prefix = FOO, key = BAR, value = CHOICE
// and
// prefix = F, key = OOBAR, value = CHOICE
// would produce the same value.
//
// With LengthOp this is tricker but not impossible. Which is why the "leafPrefixEqual" field
// in the ProofSpec is valuable to prevent this mutability. And why all trees should
// length-prefix the data before hashing it.
/**
ExistenceProof takes a key and a value and a set of steps to perform on it.
The result of peforming all these steps will provide a "root hash", which can
be compared to the value in a header.
Since it is computationally infeasible to produce a hash collission for any of the used
cryptographic hash functions, if someone can provide a series of operations to transform
a given key and value into a root hash that matches some trusted root, these key and values
must be in the referenced merkle tree.
The only possible issue is maliablity in LeafOp, such as providing extra prefix data,
which should be controlled by a spec. Eg. with lengthOp as NONE,
prefix = FOO, key = BAR, value = CHOICE
and
prefix = F, key = OOBAR, value = CHOICE
would produce the same value.
With LengthOp this is tricker but not impossible. Which is why the "leafPrefixEqual" field
in the ProofSpec is valuable to prevent this mutability. And why all trees should
length-prefix the data before hashing it.
*/
message ExistenceProof {
bytes key = 1;
bytes value = 2;
LeafOp leaf = 3;
repeated InnerOp path = 4;
}

// NonExistenceProof takes a proof of two neighbors, one left of the desired key,
// one right of the desired key. If both proofs are valid AND they are neighbors,
// then there is no valid proof for the given key.
/*
NonExistenceProof takes a proof of two neighbors, one left of the desired key,
one right of the desired key. If both proofs are valid AND they are neighbors,
then there is no valid proof for the given key.
*/
message NonExistenceProof {
bytes key = 1; // TODO: remove this as unnecessary??? we prove a range
ExistenceProof left = 2;
ExistenceProof right = 3;
}

// CommitmentProof is either an ExistenceProof or a NonExistenceProof, or a Batch of such messages
/*
CommitmentProof is either an ExistenceProof or a NonExistenceProof, or a Batch of such messages
*/
message CommitmentProof {
oneof proof {
ExistenceProof exist = 1;
Expand All @@ -87,20 +93,22 @@ message CommitmentProof {
}
}

// LeafOp represents the raw key-value data we wish to prove, and
// must be flexible to represent the internal transformation from
// the original key-value pairs into the basis hash, for many existing
// merkle trees.
//
// key and value are passed in. So that the signature of this operation is:
// leafOp(key, value) -> output
//
// To process this, first prehash the keys and values if needed (ANY means no hash in this case):
// hkey = prehashKey(key)
// hvalue = prehashValue(value)
//
// Then combine the bytes, and hash it
// output = hash(prefix || length(hkey) || hkey || length(hvalue) || hvalue)
/**
LeafOp represents the raw key-value data we wish to prove, and
must be flexible to represent the internal transformation from
the original key-value pairs into the basis hash, for many existing
merkle trees.
key and value are passed in. So that the signature of this operation is:
leafOp(key, value) -> output
To process this, first prehash the keys and values if needed (ANY means no hash in this case):
hkey = prehashKey(key)
hvalue = prehashValue(value)
Then combine the bytes, and hash it
output = hash(prefix || length(hkey) || hkey || length(hvalue) || hvalue)
*/
message LeafOp {
HashOp hash = 1;
HashOp prehash_key = 2;
Expand All @@ -111,37 +119,41 @@ message LeafOp {
bytes prefix = 5;
}

// InnerOp represents a merkle-proof step that is not a leaf.
// It represents concatenating two children and hashing them to provide the next result.
//
// The result of the previous step is passed in, so the signature of this op is:
// innerOp(child) -> output
//
// The result of applying InnerOp should be:
// output = op.hash(op.prefix || child || op.suffix)
//
// where the || operator is concatenation of binary data,
// and child is the result of hashing all the tree below this step.
//
// Any special data, like prepending child with the length, or prepending the entire operation with
// some value to differentiate from leaf nodes, should be included in prefix and suffix.
// If either of prefix or suffix is empty, we just treat it as an empty string
/**
InnerOp represents a merkle-proof step that is not a leaf.
It represents concatenating two children and hashing them to provide the next result.
The result of the previous step is passed in, so the signature of this op is:
innerOp(child) -> output
The result of applying InnerOp should be:
output = op.hash(op.prefix || child || op.suffix)
where the || operator is concatenation of binary data,
and child is the result of hashing all the tree below this step.
Any special data, like prepending child with the length, or prepending the entire operation with
some value to differentiate from leaf nodes, should be included in prefix and suffix.
If either of prefix or suffix is empty, we just treat it as an empty string
*/
message InnerOp {
HashOp hash = 1;
bytes prefix = 2;
bytes suffix = 3;
}

// ProofSpec defines what the expected parameters are for a given proof type.
// This can be stored in the client and used to validate any incoming proofs.
//
// verify(ProofSpec, Proof) -> Proof | Error
//
// As demonstrated in tests, if we don't fix the algorithm used to calculate the
// LeafHash for a given tree, there are many possible key-value pairs that can
// generate a given hash (by interpretting the preimage differently).
// We need this for proper security, requires client knows a priori what
// tree format server uses. But not in code, rather a configuration object.
/**
ProofSpec defines what the expected parameters are for a given proof type.
This can be stored in the client and used to validate any incoming proofs.
verify(ProofSpec, Proof) -> Proof | Error
As demonstrated in tests, if we don't fix the algorithm used to calculate the
LeafHash for a given tree, there are many possible key-value pairs that can
generate a given hash (by interpretting the preimage differently).
We need this for proper security, requires client knows a priori what
tree format server uses. But not in code, rather a configuration object.
*/
message ProofSpec {
// any field in the ExistenceProof must be the same as in this spec.
// except Prefix, which is just the first bytes of prefix (spec can be longer)
Expand All @@ -157,14 +169,16 @@ message ProofSpec {
bool prehash_key_before_comparison = 5;
}

// InnerSpec contains all store-specific structure info to determine if two proofs from a
// given store are neighbors.
//
// This enables:
//
// isLeftMost(spec: InnerSpec, op: InnerOp)
// isRightMost(spec: InnerSpec, op: InnerOp)
// isLeftNeighbor(spec: InnerSpec, left: InnerOp, right: InnerOp)
/*
InnerSpec contains all store-specific structure info to determine if two proofs from a
given store are neighbors.
This enables:
isLeftMost(spec: InnerSpec, op: InnerOp)
isRightMost(spec: InnerSpec, op: InnerOp)
isLeftNeighbor(spec: InnerSpec, left: InnerOp, right: InnerOp)
*/
message InnerSpec {
// Child order is the ordering of the children node, must count from 0
// iavl tree is [0, 1] (left then right)
Expand All @@ -179,7 +193,9 @@ message InnerSpec {
HashOp hash = 6;
}

// BatchProof is a group of multiple proof types than can be compressed
/*
BatchProof is a group of multiple proof types than can be compressed
*/
message BatchProof {
repeated BatchEntry entries = 1;
}
Expand All @@ -192,7 +208,7 @@ message BatchEntry {
}
}

// ====== all items here are compressed forms =======
/****** all items here are compressed forms *******/

message CompressedBatchProof {
repeated CompressedBatchEntry entries = 1;
Expand Down

0 comments on commit 7116016

Please sign in to comment.