forks/go-ethereum
1
0
Fork 1
mirror of https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum.git synced 2026-08-18 18:02:24 +00:00
Code Issues Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions 1

Typo 2021-08-22-split-postmortem.md

Browse source 
"datcopy" — there's a missing "a" here; it should be "datacopy", matching the function name used elsewhere.
This commit is contained in:
witty 2024-11-09 19:18:03 +03:00 committed by GitHub
parent 3f5f2efccb
commit 7cfeedad1d
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG key ID: B5690EEEBB952194
1 changed files with 1 additions and 1 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

2
docs/postmortems/2021-08-22-split-postmortem.md
View file

@ -56,7 +56,7 @@ On the evening of 17th, we discussed options on how to handle it. We made a stat
It was decided that in this specific instance, it would be possible to make a public announcement and a patch release: It was decided that in this specific instance, it would be possible to make a public announcement and a patch release:
- The fix can be made pretty 'generically', e.g. always copying data on input to precompiles. - The fix can be made pretty 'generically', e.g. always copying data on input to precompiles.
- The flaw is pretty difficult to find, given a generic fix in the call. The attacker needs to figure out that it concerns the precompiles, specifically the datcopy, and that it concerns the `RETURNDATA` buffer rather than the regular memory, and lastly the special circumstances to trigger it (overlapping but shifted input/output). - The flaw is pretty difficult to find, given a generic fix in the call. The attacker needs to figure out that it concerns the precompiles, specifically the datacopy, and that it concerns the `RETURNDATA` buffer rather than the regular memory, and lastly the special circumstances to trigger it (overlapping but shifted input/output).
Since we had merged the removal of `ETH65`, if the entire network were to upgrade, then nodes which have not yet implemented `ETH66` would be cut off from the network. After further discussions, we decided to: Since we had merged the removal of `ETH65`, if the entire network were to upgrade, then nodes which have not yet implemented `ETH66` would be cut off from the network. After further discussions, we decided to: