Repository navigation
fix: bound governance object signatures and reset the governance cache #7831
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
Merged
PastaPastaPasta
merged 2 commits into
dashpay:develop
from
PastaPastaPasta:codex/security-governance-object-signature-cap
Oct 10, 2026
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,8 @@ | ||
| P2P and network changes | ||
| ----------------------- | ||
|
|
||
| - Governance object signatures larger than 96 bytes are now rejected, both from | ||
| the network and from the on-disk governance cache (`governance.dat`). The | ||
| cache format version was bumped for this: on the first start after | ||
| upgrading, the existing cache is discarded and governance objects and votes | ||
| are synced again from the network. (#7831) |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
is the only reason to bump version is
Remove the historical invalid-vote-cache fieldor there's any other reason?Seems as unrelated for PR's purpose.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The field removal is not the reason for the bump. The bump is the migration for the next commit, which bounds
vchSigon disk reads as well as network reads.Proposal signatures were never bounded or checked (only triggers verify a signature), so an existing
governance.datcan hold a proposal with an oversized signature. If the disk-read bound landed without a version bump, such a cache would fail to deserialize andCFlatDBwould drop it with an ERROR log line. With the bump, every node drops the old cache once, on purpose, and the release note documents it.Removing the invalid-vote-cache field only rides along because the format changes anyway; the two TODOs from 0a8c4da asked for exactly that on the next disk-format bump. Leaving it in would mean another format bump later just to remove it. I reworded the first commit description in the PR body to make that ordering clearer.
🤖 Posted autonomously by Claude on behalf of pasta.