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

discovery: fix bug that can lead to sending invalid chan_ann msgs #9002

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 14, 2024

Conversation

Roasbeef
Copy link
Member

@Roasbeef Roasbeef commented Aug 14, 2024

Initially in lnd, we didn't store the extra TLV data that could be dangling off of gossip messages. This was fixed initially in lnd v0.5 with this PR: #1825.

Within the PR, we incorrectly set the ExtraOpaqueData (extra TLV blob) of the ChannelAnnouncement to the value stored in edge, which is actually our channel update. As 6-ish years ago we didn't yet have anything that used the TLV gossip fields, this went unnoticed.

Fast forward to 2024, we shipped an experimental version of inbound fee discounts. This starts to store additional data in the ExtraOpaqueData field: the TLV for the inbound fee discount. Initially, everything is valid when the first ChannelAnnouncement is sent, but as soon as a user attempts to set an inbound fee policy, we'd incorrectly swap in that new serialized TLV for the channel announcement:
841e243#diff-1eda595bbebe495bd74a6a0431c46b66cb4e8b53beb311067c010feac2665dcbR2560.

Since we're just trying to generate a new channel_update, we don't also regenerate the signature for the channel_announcement message. As a result, we end up storing a channel_announcement with an invalid sig on disk, continuing to broadcast that to peers.

Fixes #9000

@Roasbeef Roasbeef added bug fix gossip size/micro small bug fix or feature, less than 15 mins of review, less than 250 labels Aug 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Aug 14, 2024

Important

Review skipped

Auto reviews are limited to specific labels.

Labels to auto review (1)
  • llm-review

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.


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.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

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 an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

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

CodeRabbit Configuration 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.

Initially in lnd, we didn't store the extra TLV data that could be
dangling off of gossip messages. This was fixed initially in lnd v0.5
with this PR: lightningnetwork#1825.

Within the PR, we incorrect set the `ExtraOpaqueData` (extra TLV blob)
of the `ChannelAnnouncement` to the value stored in `edge`, which is
actually our channel update. As 6-ish years ago we didn't yet have
anything that used the TLV gossip fields, this went unnoticed.

Fast forward to 2024, we shipped an experimental version of inbounbd
fees. This starts to store additional data in the `ExtraOpaqueData`
field, the TLV for the inbound fee. Initially, everything is valid when
the first `ChannelAnnouncement` is sent, but as soon as a user attempts
to set an inbound fee policy, we'd incorrectly swap in that new
serialized TLV for the _channel announcement_:
lightningnetwork@841e243#diff-1eda595bbebe495bd74a6a0431c46b66cb4e8b53beb311067c010feac2665dcbR2560.

Since we're just trying to generate a new `channel_update`, we don't
also regenerate the signature for the `channel_announcement` message. As
a result, we end up storing a `channel_announcement` with an invalid sig
on disk, continuing to broadcast that to peers.
Copy link
Collaborator

@bitromortac bitromortac 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
Collaborator

@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM🙏 Wonder what happens to the existing nodes - I guess a restart should be enough to fix the issue for them.

@@ -60,6 +60,10 @@ commitment when the channel was force closed.
* We'll now always send [channel updates to our remote peer for open
channels](https://github.com/lightningnetwork/lnd/pull/8963).

* [A bug has been fixed that could cause invalid channel
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cool think we need to do a new rc?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, I think we have another PR or two incoming to trigger a new rc.

Copy link
Collaborator

@Crypt-iQ Crypt-iQ left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm 🌮

@yyforyongyu yyforyongyu merged commit 77c7f77 into lightningnetwork:master Aug 14, 2024
29 of 34 checks passed
@Roasbeef
Copy link
Member Author

Wonder what happens to the existing nodes - I guess a restart should be enough to fix the issue for them.

Reading the code diff again, we don't update the chan ann on disk to be invalid, just when we were making the wire message, we swapped in the wrong TLV data. So the chan ann's on disk are valid, and now with this PR as soon as we go to update the chan upds (zombie prevention or updatechanpolicy) we'll send out the new valid announcement.

@Roasbeef Roasbeef added this to the v0.18.3 milestone Aug 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug fix gossip size/micro small bug fix or feature, less than 15 mins of review, less than 250
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[bug] channel announcement signatures must cover the tlv stream
4 participants