This is one further step towards removing account management from
`geth`. This PR deprecates the flag `unlock`, and makes the flag moot:
unlock via geth is no longer possible.
This PR is a first step towards removing account management from geth,
and contains a lot of the user-facing changes.
With this PR, the `personal` namespace disappears. **Note**: `personal`
namespace has been deprecated for quite some time (since
https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/pull/26390 1 year and 8 months
ago), and users who have wanted to use it has been forced to used the
flag `--rpc.enabledeprecatedpersonal`. So I think it's fairly
non-controversial to drop it at this point.
Specifically, this means:
- Account/wallet listing
-`personal.getListAccounts`
-`personal.listAccounts`
-`personal.getListWallets`
-`personal.listWallets`
- Lock/unlock
-`personal.lockAccount`
-`personal.openWallet`
-`personal.unlockAccount`
- Sign ops
-`personal.sign`
-`personal.sendTransaction`
-`personal.signTransaction`
- Imports / inits
-`personal.deriveAccount`
-`personal.importRawKey`
-`personal.initializeWallet`
-`personal.newAccount`
-`personal.unpair`
- Other:
-`personal.ecRecover`
The underlying keystores and account managent code is still in place,
which means that `geth --dev` still works as expected, so that e.g. the
example below still works:
```
> eth.sendTransaction({data:"0x6060", value: 1, from:eth.accounts[0]})
```
Also, `ethkey` and `clef` are untouched.
With the removal of `personal`, as far as I know we have no more API
methods which contain credentials, and if we want to implement
logging-capabilities of RPC ingress payload, it would be possible after
this.
---------
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
Changelog: https://golangci-lint.run/product/changelog/#1610
Removes `exportloopref` (no longer needed), replaces it with
`copyloopvar` which is basically the opposite.
Also adds:
- `durationcheck`
- `gocheckcompilerdirectives`
- `reassign`
- `mirror`
- `tenv`
---------
Co-authored-by: Marius van der Wijden <m.vanderwijden@live.de>
This PR fixes a flaky jwt-test.
The test is a jwt "from one second in the future". The test passes; the
reason for this is that the CI-system is slow, and by the time the jwt
is actually evaluated, that second has passed, and it's no longer
future.
Alternative to #30380
Node discovery periodically revalidates the nodes in its table by sending PING, checking
if they are still alive. I recently noticed some issues with the implementation of this
process, which can cause strange results such as nodes dropping unexpectedly, certain
nodes not getting revalidated often enough, and bad results being returned to incoming
FINDNODE queries.
In this change, the revalidation process is improved with the following logic:
- We maintain two 'revalidation lists' containing the table nodes, named 'fast' and 'slow'.
- The process chooses random nodes from each list on a randomized interval, the interval being
faster for the 'fast' list, and performs revalidation for the chosen node.
- Whenever a node is newly inserted into the table, it goes into the 'fast' list.
Once validation passes, it transfers to the 'slow' list. If a request fails, or the
node changes endpoint, it transfers back into 'fast'.
- livenessChecks is incremented by one for successful checks. Unlike the old implementation,
we will not drop the node on the first failing check. We instead quickly decay the
livenessChecks give it another chance.
- Order of nodes in bucket doesn't matter anymore.
I am also adding a debug API endpoint to dump the node table content.
Co-authored-by: Martin HS <martin@swende.se>
Node discovery periodically revalidates the nodes in its table by sending PING, checking
if they are still alive. I recently noticed some issues with the implementation of this
process, which can cause strange results such as nodes dropping unexpectedly, certain
nodes not getting revalidated often enough, and bad results being returned to incoming
FINDNODE queries.
In this change, the revalidation process is improved with the following logic:
- We maintain two 'revalidation lists' containing the table nodes, named 'fast' and 'slow'.
- The process chooses random nodes from each list on a randomized interval, the interval being
faster for the 'fast' list, and performs revalidation for the chosen node.
- Whenever a node is newly inserted into the table, it goes into the 'fast' list.
Once validation passes, it transfers to the 'slow' list. If a request fails, or the
node changes endpoint, it transfers back into 'fast'.
- livenessChecks is incremented by one for successful checks. Unlike the old implementation,
we will not drop the node on the first failing check. We instead quickly decay the
livenessChecks give it another chance.
- Order of nodes in bucket doesn't matter anymore.
I am also adding a debug API endpoint to dump the node table content.
Co-authored-by: Martin HS <martin@swende.se>
Here we add a beacon chain light client for use by geth.
Geth can now be configured to run against a beacon chain API endpoint,
without pointing a CL to it. To set this up, use the `--beacon.api` flag. Information
provided by the beacon chain is verified, i.e. geth does not blindly trust the beacon
API endpoint in this mode. The root of trust are the beacon chain 'sync committees'.
The configured beacon API endpoint must provide light client data. At this time, only
Lodestar and Nimbus provide the necessary APIs.
There is also a standalone tool, cmd/blsync, which uses the beacon chain light client
to drive any EL implementation via its engine API.
---------
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
This raises the JSON-RPC batch request limits significantly for the engine API endpoint.
The limits are now also hard-coded, so users won't get them wrong. I have chosen these limits:
maximum batch items: 2000
maximum batch response size: 250MB
While it would also be possible to disable batch limits completely for the engine API,
I think having some limits is a good safety net against misbehaving CLs. Since this
isn't configurable, we really want to ensure this limit will never become an issue in the
CL/EL communication, so I set them quite high.
---------
Signed-off-by: jsvisa <delweng@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
This PR adds server-side limits for JSON-RPC batch requests. Before this change, batches
were limited only by processing time. The server would pick calls from the batch and
answer them until the response timeout occurred, then stop processing the remaining batch
items.
Here, we are adding two additional limits which can be configured:
- the 'item limit': batches can have at most N items
- the 'response size limit': batches can contain at most X response bytes
These limits are optional in package rpc. In Geth, we set a default limit of 1000 items
and 25MB response size.
When a batch goes over the limit, an error response is returned to the client. However,
doing this correctly isn't always possible. In JSON-RPC, only method calls with a valid
`id` can be responded to. Since batches may also contain non-call messages or
notifications, the best effort thing we can do to report an error with the batch itself is
reporting the limit violation as an error for the first method call in the batch. If a batch is
too large, but contains only notifications and responses, the error will be reported with
a null `id`.
The RPC client was also changed so it can deal with errors resulting from too large
batches. An older client connected to the server code in this PR could get stuck
until the request timeout occurred when the batch is too large. **Upgrading to a version
of the RPC client containing this change is strongly recommended to avoid timeout issues.**
For some weird reason, when writing the original client implementation, @fjl worked off of
the assumption that responses could be distributed across batches arbitrarily. So for a
batch request containing requests `[A B C]`, the server could respond with `[A B C]` but
also with `[A B] [C]` or even `[A] [B] [C]` and it wouldn't make a difference to the
client.
So in the implementation of BatchCallContext, the client waited for all requests in the
batch individually. If the server didn't respond to some of the requests in the batch, the
client would eventually just time out (if a context was used).
With the addition of batch limits into the server, we anticipate that people will hit this
kind of error way more often. To handle this properly, the client now waits for a single
response batch and expects it to contain all responses to the requests.
---------
Co-authored-by: Felix Lange <fjl@twurst.com>
Co-authored-by: Martin Holst Swende <martin@swende.se>
