Skip to content
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

Audit dcrtime results against dcrdata #48

Open
fernandoabolafio opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Open

Audit dcrtime results against dcrdata #48

fernandoabolafio opened this issue Mar 17, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
feature This issue referes to a new functionality implementation

Comments

@fernandoabolafio
Copy link
Member

In order to increase the reliability of the timestamp results, the app needs to audit the anchored results in dcrtime by:

  • Check that the digest of a given result is in the provided merkle path.
  • Check that the merkle path leads to the provided merkle root.
  • Check that the merkle root is in the provided transaction.
@fernandoabolafio fernandoabolafio added the feature This issue referes to a new functionality implementation label Apr 22, 2019
@tiagoalvesdulce
Copy link
Member

tiagoalvesdulce commented Mar 2, 2023

We can add a section that works pretty much the same as the dcrtime_checker CLI in the future. This way a user will be able to verify directly against the blockchain. Keeping this issue open until this is implemented.

Quoting Dave on matrix:

A proof file consists of a digest to prove, the merkle root, the leaves of hashes needed to provide that digest is actually covered by the merkle root, and some other things.
When you drop a non-proof file, the only thing you have available is the hash of the file, so it goes and does a database lookup. The functionality is convenient, and should definitely stay. It works well for the service itself.
However, when it comes to actually proving a hash is timestamped with a proof file, that functionality is missing from the GUI.

Depends on decred/dcrtime#89

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature This issue referes to a new functionality implementation
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants