## Proposed Changes
I did some gardening 🌳 in our dependency tree:
- Remove duplicate versions of `warp` (git vs patch)
- Remove duplicate versions of lots of small deps: `cpufeatures`, `ethabi`, `ethereum-types`, `bitvec`, `nix`, `libsecp256k1`.
- Update MDBX (should resolve#3028). I tested and Lighthouse compiles on Windows 11 now.
- Restore `psutil` back to upstream
- Make some progress updating everything to rand 0.8. There are a few crates stuck on 0.7.
Hopefully this puts us on a better footing for future `cargo audit` issues, and improves compile times slightly.
## Additional Info
Some crates are held back by issues with `zeroize`. libp2p-noise depends on [`chacha20poly1305`](https://crates.io/crates/chacha20poly1305) which depends on zeroize < v1.5, and we can only have one version of zeroize because it's post 1.0 (see https://github.com/rust-lang/cargo/issues/6584). The latest version of `zeroize` is v1.5.4, which is used by the new versions of many other crates (e.g. `num-bigint-dig`). Once a new version of chacha20poly1305 is released we can update libp2p-noise and upgrade everything to the latest `zeroize` version.
I've also opened a PR to `blst` related to zeroize: https://github.com/supranational/blst/pull/111
## Issue Addressed
N/A
## Proposed Changes
Fix the upper bound for blocks by root responses to be equal to the max merge block size instead of altair.
Further make the rpc response limits fork aware.
## Proposed Changes
Increase the default `--slots-per-restore-point` to 8192 for a 4x reduction in freezer DB disk usage.
Existing nodes that use the previous default of 2048 will be left unchanged. Newly synced nodes (with or without checkpoint sync) will use the new 8192 default.
Long-term we could do away with the freezer DB entirely for validator-only nodes, but this change is much simpler and grants us some extra space in the short term. We can also roll it out gradually across our nodes by purging databases one by one, while keeping the Ansible config the same.
## Additional Info
We ignore a change from 2048 to 8192 if the user hasn't set the 8192 explicitly. We fire a debug log in the case where we do ignore:
```
DEBG Ignoring slots-per-restore-point config in favour of on-disk value, on_disk: 2048, config: 8192
```
## Proposed Changes
Mitigate the fork choice attacks described in [_Three Attacks on Proof-of-Stake Ethereum_](https://arxiv.org/abs/2110.10086) by enabling proposer boost @ 70% on mainnet.
Proposer boost has been running with stability on Prater for a few months now, and is safe to roll out gradually on mainnet. I'll argue that the financial impact of rolling out gradually is also minimal.
Consider how a proposer-boosted validator handles two types of re-orgs:
## Ex ante re-org (from the paper)
In the mitigated attack, a malicious proposer releases their block at slot `n + 1` late so that it re-orgs the block at the slot _after_ them (at slot `n + 2`). Non-boosting validators will follow this re-org and vote for block `n + 1` in slot `n + 2`. Boosted validators will vote for `n + 2`. If the boosting validators are outnumbered, there'll be a re-org to the malicious block from `n + 1` and validators applying the boost will have their slot `n + 2` attestations miss head (and target on an epoch boundary). Note that all the attesters from slot `n + 1` are doomed to lose their head vote rewards, but this is the same regardless of boosting.
Therefore, Lighthouse nodes stand to miss slightly more head votes than other nodes if they are in the minority while applying the proposer boost. Once the proposer boost nodes gain a majority, this trend reverses.
## Ex post re-org (using the boost)
The other type of re-org is an ex post re-org using the strategy described here: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2860. With this strategy, boosted nodes will follow the attempted re-org and again lose a head vote if the re-org is unsuccessful. Once boosting is widely adopted, the re-orgs will succeed and the non-boosting validators will lose out.
I don't think there are (m)any validators applying this strategy, because it is irrational to attempt it before boosting is widely adopted. Therefore I think we can safely ignore this possibility.
## Risk Assessment
From observing re-orgs on mainnet I don't think ex ante re-orgs are very common. I've observed around 1 per day for the last month on my node (see: https://gist.github.com/michaelsproul/3b2142fa8fe0ff767c16553f96959e8c), compared to 2.5 ex post re-orgs per day.
Given one extra slot per day where attesting will cause a missed head vote, each individual validator has a 1/32 chance of being assigned to that slot. So we have an increase of 1/32 missed head votes per validator per day in expectation. Given that we currently see ~7 head vote misses per validator per day due to late/missing blocks (and re-orgs), this represents only a (1/32)/7 = 0.45% increase in missed head votes in expectation. I believe this is so small that we shouldn't worry about it. Particularly as getting proposer boost deployed is good for network health and may enable us to drive down the number of late blocks over time (which will decrease head vote misses).
## TL;DR
Enable proposer boost now and release ASAP, as financial downside is a 0.45% increase in missed head votes until widespread adoption.
## Proposed Changes
Add a `lighthouse db` command with three initial subcommands:
- `lighthouse db version`: print the database schema version.
- `lighthouse db migrate --to N`: manually upgrade (or downgrade!) the database to a different version.
- `lighthouse db inspect --column C`: log the key and size in bytes of every value in a given `DBColumn`.
This PR lays the groundwork for other changes, namely:
- Mark's fast-deposit sync (https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2915), for which I think we should implement a database downgrade (from v9 to v8).
- My `tree-states` work, which already implements a downgrade (v10 to v8).
- Standalone purge commands like `lighthouse db purge-dht` per https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/issues/2824.
## Additional Info
I updated the `strum` crate to 0.24.0, which necessitated some changes in the network code to remove calls to deprecated methods.
Thanks to @winksaville for the motivation, and implementation work that I used as a source of inspiration (https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/pull/2685).
## Issue Addressed
MEV boost compatibility
## Proposed Changes
See #2987
## Additional Info
This is blocked on the stabilization of a couple specs, [here](https://github.com/ethereum/beacon-APIs/pull/194) and [here](https://github.com/flashbots/mev-boost/pull/20).
Additional TODO's and outstanding questions
- [ ] MEV boost JWT Auth
- [ ] Will `builder_proposeBlindedBlock` return the revealed payload for the BN to propogate
- [ ] Should we remove `private-tx-proposals` flag and communicate BN <> VC with blinded blocks by default once these endpoints enter the beacon-API's repo? This simplifies merge transition logic.
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
N/A
## Proposed Changes
- Update the JSON-RPC id field for both our request and response objects to be a `serde_json::Value` rather than a `u32`. This field could be a string or a number according to the JSON-RPC 2.0 spec. We only ever set it to a number, but if, for example, we get a response that wraps this number in quotes, we would fail to deserialize it. I think because we're not doing any validation around this id otherwise, we should be less strict with it in this regard.
## Additional Info
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
In the first Goerli shadow-fork, Lighthouse was getting timeouts from Geth which prevented the LH+Geth pair from progressing.
There's not a whole lot of information I can use to set these timeouts. The most interesting pieces of information I have are quotes from Marius from Geth:
- *"Fcu also needs to construct the block which can take 2sec"* ([Discord](https://discord.com/channels/595666850260713488/910910348922589184/958006487052066836))
- *"2 sec should be ok for new payload, weird that it times out"* ([Discord](https://discord.com/channels/595666850260713488/910910348922589184/958006487052066836))
I don't think we should be so worried about getting these timeouts correct now. No one really knows how long the various EEs are going to take, it's a bit too early in development. With these changes I'm giving some headroom so that we don't fail just because EEs are quite optimized enough. I've set the value to 6s (half a mainnet slot), since I think anything beyond 6s is an interesting problem that we want to know about sooner rather than later.
## Additional Info
NA
## Issue Addressed
N/A
## Proposed Changes
Set the engine state to `EngineState::Offline` if the engine api call fails during broadcast. This caused issues while pausing sync when the execution engine is offline because `EngineState` always returned `Synced`.
## Issue Addressed
N/A
## Proposed Changes
The slashing db import log showed the latest proposed block in the db as `latest block` which might be potentially confusing.
## Proposed Changes
Allow Lighthouse to speculatively create blocks via the `/eth/v1/validators/blocks` endpoint by optionally skipping the RANDAO verification that we introduced in #2740. When `verify_randao=false` is passed as a query parameter the `randao_reveal` is not required to be present, and if present will only be lightly checked (must be a valid BLS sig). If `verify_randao` is omitted it defaults to true and Lighthouse behaves exactly as it did previously, hence this PR is backwards-compatible.
I'd like to get this change into `unstable` pretty soon as I've got 3 projects building on top of it:
- [`blockdreamer`](https://github.com/michaelsproul/blockdreamer), which mocks block production every slot in order to fingerprint clients
- analysis of Lighthouse's block packing _optimality_, which uses `blockdreamer` to extract interesting instances of the attestation packing problem
- analysis of Lighthouse's block packing _performance_ (as in speed) on the `tree-states` branch
## Additional Info
Having tested `blockdreamer` with Prysm, Nimbus and Teku I noticed that none of them verify the randao signature on `/eth/v1/validator/blocks`. I plan to open a PR to the `beacon-APIs` repo anyway so that this parameter can be standardised in case the other clients add RANDAO verification by default in future.
## Issue Addressed
No issue, just updating merge ASCII art.
## Proposed Changes
Updating ASCII art for merge.
## Additional Info
Please provide any additional information. For example, future considerations
or information useful for reviewers.
## Issue Addressed
#3103
## Proposed Changes
Parse `http-address` and `metrics-address` as `IpAddr` for both the beacon node and validator client to support IPv6 addresses.
Also adjusts parsing of CORS origins to allow for IPv6 addresses.
## Usage
You can now set `http-address` and/or `metrics-address` flags to IPv6 addresses.
For example, the following:
`lighthouse bn --http --http-address :: --metrics --metrics-address ::1`
will expose the beacon node HTTP server on `[::]` (equivalent of `0.0.0.0` in IPv4) and the metrics HTTP server on `localhost` (the equivalent of `127.0.0.1` in IPv4)
The beacon node API can then be accessed by:
`curl "http://[server-ipv6-address]:5052/eth/v1/some_endpoint"`
And the metrics server api can be accessed by:
`curl "http://localhost:5054/metrics"` or by `curl "http://[::1]:5054/metrics"`
## Additional Info
On most Linux distributions the `v6only` flag is set to `false` by default (see the section for the `IPV6_V6ONLY` flag in https://www.man7.org/linux/man-pages/man7/ipv6.7.html) which means IPv4 connections will continue to function on a IPv6 address (providing it is appropriately mapped). This means that even if the Lighthouse API is running on `::` it is also possible to accept IPv4 connections.
However on Windows, this is not the case. The `v6only` flag is set to `true` so binding to `::` will only allow IPv6 connections.
## Issue Addressed
Removes the await points in sync waiting for a processor response for rpc block processing. Built on top of #3029
This also handles a couple of bugs in the previous code and adds a relatively comprehensive test suite.
## Issue Addressed
Attempt to fix CI
## Proposed Changes
- ~~install `node-gyp-build` which should look for prebuilt binaries for `@truffle-suite/bigint_buffer`. This should make it so we don't have to build it directly. See: https://github.com/trufflesuite/ganache/pull/1414~~ this didn't work
- This also uses the `setup-node` action because it includes caching. Sort of a shot in the dark, but the ganache github repo uses it and the failures seem to be for missing files in a node cache
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
Hopefully makes windows ganache installation more reliable.
## Proposed Changes
- use `chocolatey` to install windows build tools. This seems to often be the prescribed solution for `node gyp` issues. `chocolatey` is used here because `npm install --global --production windows-build-tools` hangs in github actions
## Additional Info
I still haven't found why the prior installation technique would sometimes work, the `windows-2019` environments seem to be identical across successes and failures. I think this should be re-run a few times to see if it can consistently pass
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
No issue
## Proposed Changes
Correct typos in book
## Additional Info
Nothing to add
Co-authored-by: Emilia Hane <58548332+emhane@users.noreply.github.com>
## Issue Addressed
Fix the `cargo-audit` failure for the recent openssl bug involving parsing of untrusted certificates (CVE-2022-0778).
## Additional Info
Lighthouse loads remote certificates in the following cases:
* When connecting to an eth1 node (`--eth1-endpoints`).
* When connecting to a beacon node from the VC (`--beacon-nodes`).
* When connecting to a beacon node for checkpoint sync (`--checkpoint-sync-url`).
In all of these cases we are already placing a lot of trust in the server at the other end, however due to the scope for MITM attacks we are still potentially vulnerable. E.g. an ISP could inject an invalid certificate for the remote host which would cause Lighthouse to hang indefinitely.
## Proposed Changes
Set a minimum supported Rust version (MSRV) in the `Cargo.toml` for the Lighthouse binary so that attempts to compile it with an outdated compiler fail immediately with a clear error.
To ensure that the codebase builds with the MSRV I've also added a Github actions job that runs `cargo check` using the MSRV extracted from `Cargo.toml`. This will force us to keep it up to date.
I opted to use `cargo check` rather than Clippy because Clippy frequently introduces new lints that we adopt, so our MSRV for Clippy is usually the most recent Rust version, while the MSRV for building Lighthouse is older.
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
Address a CI failure in the release suite.
Example: https://github.com/sigp/lighthouse/actions/runs/1984266187
## Additional Info
I believe we should merge this into `unstable` and `stable`. Then, move the `v2.1.4` commit to target the commit with the updated CI. It's sad that v2.1.4 has two commits, but they're functionally equivalent for users.
## Issue Addressed
NA
## Proposed Changes
- Bump version to `v2.1.4`
- Run `cargo update`
## Additional Info
I think this release should be published around the 15th of March.
Presently `blocked` for testing on our infrastructure.
## Issue Addressed
#3073
## Proposed Changes
Add around `SAFE_SLOTS_TO_IMPORT_OPTIMISTICALLY` in the API
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
Which issue # does this PR address?
## Proposed Changes
Please list or describe the changes introduced by this PR.
## Additional Info
Please provide any additional information. For example, future considerations
or information useful for reviewers.
Co-authored-by: Pawan Dhananjay <pawandhananjay@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <sean@sigmaprime.io>
## Issue Addressed
This address an issue which was preventing checkpoint-sync.
When the node starts from checkpoint sync, the head block and the finalized block are the same value. We did not respect this when sending a `forkchoiceUpdated` (fcU) call to the EL and were expecting fork choice to hold the *finalized ancestor of the head* and returning an error when it didn't.
This PR uses *only fork choice* for sending fcU updates. This is actually quite nice and avoids some atomicity issues between `chain.canonical_head` and `chain.fork_choice`. Now, whenever `chain.fork_choice.get_head` returns a value we also cache the values required for the next fcU call.
## TODO
- [x] ~~Blocked on #3043~~
- [x] Ensure there isn't a warn message at startup.
## Issue Addressed
Don't send an fcU message at startup if it's pre-genesis. The startup fcU message is not critical, not required by the spec, so it's fine to avoid it for networks that start post-Bellatrix fork.
## Issue Addressed
Presently if the VC is configured with a fee recipient it will error out when sending fee-recipient preparations to a beacon node that doesn't yet support the API:
```
Mar 08 22:23:36.236 ERRO Unable to publish proposer preparation error: All endpoints failed https://eth2-beacon-prater.infura.io/ => RequestFailed(StatusCode(404)), service: preparation
```
This doesn't affect other VC duties, but could be a source of anxiety for users trying to do the right thing and configure their fee recipients in advance.
## Proposed Changes
Change the preparation service to only send preparations if the current slot is later than 2 epochs before the Bellatrix hard fork epoch.
## Additional Info
I've tagged this v2.1.4 as I think it's a small change that's worth having for the next release
## Issue Addressed
Resolves#2936
## Proposed Changes
Adds functionality for calling [`validator/prepare_beacon_proposer`](https://ethereum.github.io/beacon-APIs/?urls.primaryName=dev#/Validator/prepareBeaconProposer) in advance.
There is a `BeaconChain::prepare_beacon_proposer` method which, which called, computes the proposer for the next slot. If that proposer has been registered via the `validator/prepare_beacon_proposer` API method, then the `beacon_chain.execution_layer` will be provided the `PayloadAttributes` for us in all future forkchoiceUpdated calls. An artificial forkchoiceUpdated call will be created 4s before each slot, when the head updates and when a validator updates their information.
Additionally, I added strict ordering for calls from the `BeaconChain` to the `ExecutionLayer`. I'm not certain the `ExecutionLayer` will always maintain this ordering, but it's a good start to have consistency from the `BeaconChain`. There are some deadlock opportunities introduced, they are documented in the code.
## Additional Info
- ~~Blocked on #2837~~
Co-authored-by: realbigsean <seananderson33@GMAIL.com>
## Issue Addressed
Resolves#3015
## Proposed Changes
Add JWT token based authentication to engine api requests. The jwt secret key is read from the provided file and is used to sign tokens that are used for authenticated communication with the EL node.
- [x] Interop with geth (synced `merge-devnet-4` with the `merge-kiln-v2` branch on geth)
- [x] Interop with other EL clients (nethermind on `merge-devnet-4`)
- [x] ~Implement `zeroize` for jwt secrets~
- [x] Add auth server tests with `mock_execution_layer`
- [x] Get auth working with the `execution_engine_integration` tests
Co-authored-by: Paul Hauner <paul@paulhauner.com>
## Issue Addressed
#3010
## Proposed Changes
- move log debounce time latch to `./common/logging`
- add timelatch to limit logging for `attestations_delay_queue` and `queued_block_roots`
## Additional Info
- Is a separate crate for the time latch preferred?
- `elapsed()` could take `LOG_DEBOUNCE_INTERVAL ` as an argument to allow for different granularity.
## Issue Addressed
Addresses spec changes from v1.1.0:
- https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2830
- https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2846
## Proposed Changes
* Downgrade the REJECT for `HeadBlockFinalized` to an IGNORE. This applies to both unaggregated and aggregated attestations.
## Additional Info
I thought about also changing the penalty for `UnknownTargetRoot` but I don't think it's reachable in practice.
## Issue Addressed
As discussed on last-night's consensus call, the testnets next week will target the [Kiln Spec v2](https://hackmd.io/@n0ble/kiln-spec).
Presently, we support Kiln V1. V2 is backwards compatible, except for renaming `random` to `prev_randao` in:
- https://github.com/ethereum/execution-apis/pull/180
- https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2835
With this PR we'll no longer be compatible with the existing Kintsugi and Kiln testnets, however we'll be ready for the testnets next week. I raised this breaking change in the call last night, we are all keen to move forward and break things.
We now target the [`merge-kiln-v2`](https://github.com/MariusVanDerWijden/go-ethereum/tree/merge-kiln-v2) branch for interop with Geth. This required adding the `--http.aauthport` to the tester to avoid a port conflict at startup.
### Changes to exec integration tests
There's some change in the `merge-kiln-v2` version of Geth that means it can't compile on a vanilla Github runner. Bumping the `go` version on the runner solved this issue.
Whilst addressing this, I refactored the `testing/execution_integration` crate to be a *binary* rather than a *library* with tests. This means that we don't need to run the `build.rs` and build Geth whenever someone runs `make lint` or `make test-release`. This is nice for everyday users, but it's also nice for CI so that we can have a specific runner for these tests and we don't need to ensure *all* runners support everything required to build all execution clients.
## More Info
- [x] ~~EF tests are failing since the rename has broken some tests that reference the old field name. I have been told there will be new tests released in the coming days (25/02/22 or 26/02/22).~~
