-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
Add additional signed data checks #168
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
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 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 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 |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -84,9 +84,17 @@ export const batchInsertData = async (requestBody: unknown): Promise<ApiResponse | |
// is acceptable, but we only want to store one data for each timestamp. | ||
for (const signedData of batchSignedData) { | ||
const requestTimestamp = Number.parseInt(signedData.timestamp, 10); | ||
const goReadDb = await go(async () => get(signedData.airnode, signedData.templateId, requestTimestamp)); | ||
if (goReadDb.data && requestTimestamp === Number.parseInt(goReadDb.data.timestamp, 10)) { | ||
logger.debug('Not storing signed data because signed data with the same timestamp already exists.', { | ||
const goReadDb = await go(async () => get(signedData.airnode, signedData.templateId)); | ||
|
||
if (goReadDb.data && requestTimestamp <= Number.parseInt(goReadDb.data.timestamp, 10)) { | ||
logger.debug('Not storing signed data because the signed data is not newer than what we already have.', { | ||
signedData, | ||
}); | ||
continue; | ||
} | ||
|
||
if (Date.now() / 1000 - requestTimestamp > 60 * 60) { | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Mhh, what is wrong with >1h old signed data? |
||
logger.debug('Not storing signed data because the timestamp is older than one hour.', { | ||
signedData, | ||
}); | ||
continue; | ||
|
This file contains 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
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.
We want to store even older data we have because it might be served by other (delayed) endpoint. To address the issue we would need to check whether the signed data will be pruned, but checking that is more complex than I initially thought (and probably not worth relative to the added benefit).