From 544eb9acd3027cb408e6589bfe37d6b92a224bbd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Simon Noetzlin Date: Thu, 3 Aug 2023 10:00:52 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Update docs/docs/adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md Co-authored-by: Marius Poke --- .../adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/docs/docs/adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md b/docs/docs/adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md index 4f96bb8419..caf722e750 100644 --- a/docs/docs/adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md +++ b/docs/docs/adrs/adr-005-cryptographic-equivocation-verification.md @@ -39,6 +39,8 @@ Note that in this case, either the primary or the witness or both are malicious. To orchestrate a light client attack, Byzantine actors create a header with incorrect state transitions that must be signed by ⅓+ of the voting power. The types of light client attacks are defined by analyzing the differences between the conflicting headers. +There are three types of light client attacks: lunatic attack, equivocation attack, and amnesia attack. +For details, see the [CometBFT specification](https://github.com/cometbft/cometbft/blob/main/spec/light-client/attacks/notes-on-evidence-handling.md#evidence-handling). If at least one deterministic states isn't equal, i.e. a state resulting from a previous block (see [CometBFT spec.](https://github.com/cometbft/cometbft/blob/main/spec/core/data_structures.md#header)), it is referred to a “lunatic attack”. Conversely, in the opposite case, it is termed an “equivocation”, (see [CometBFT spec](https://github.com/cometbft/cometbft/blob/main/spec/light-client/detection/detection_003_reviewed.md)).