search

bitshares / bitshares-core

BitShares Blockchain node and command-line wallet
https://bitshares.github.io/
Other
1.17k stars 643 forks source link

Buyback orders that fail to place should not show in account history #2691

Open abitmore opened 1 year ago

abitmore commented 1 year ago

Bug Description

On Testnet:

>>> get_account_history special-account 3
61978003 2022-11-21T20:41:00 1.11.151387577 Create limit order to sell 10 SPECIALA for 0.0001 SPECIAL   (Fee: 0 TEST) 
61977906 2022-11-21T20:36:00 1.11.151387576 Create limit order to sell 10 SPECIALA for 0.0001 SPECIAL   (Fee: 0 TEST) 
61977809 2022-11-21T20:31:00 1.11.151387575 Create limit order to sell 10 SPECIALA for 0.0001 SPECIAL   (Fee: 0 TEST)

Note that there is no result showing with these orders. A normal limit order looks like this:

61978048 2022-11-21T20:43:24 1.11.151387578 Create limit order to sell 1 TEST for 1000 CONTEST.BTC   (Fee: 0.00100 TEST)   result: 1.7.9085458

Actually the results of those orders are [0,{}] aka void_result():

>>> get_object 1.11.151387577
[{
    "id": "1.11.151387577",
    "op": [
      1,{
        "fee": {
          "amount": 0,
          "asset_id": "1.3.0"
        },
        "seller": "1.2.3564",
        "amount_to_sell": {
          "amount": 100000,
          "asset_id": "1.3.329"
        },
        "min_to_receive": {
          "amount": 1,
          "asset_id": "1.3.330"
        },
        "expiration": "2106-02-07T06:28:15",
        "fill_or_kill": false,
        "extensions": []
      }
    ],
    "result": [
      0,{}
    ],
    "block_num": 61978003,
    "trx_in_block": 0,
    "op_in_trx": 0,
    "virtual_op": 0,
    "is_virtual": true,
    "block_time": "2022-11-21T20:41:00"
  }
]

According to the log messages, there was an error when placing these orders, so no order was successfully placed:

create_buyback_order ] Skipping buyback processing selling 1.3.329 for {"id":"1.3.330","symbol":"SPECIAL","precision":4,"issuer":"1.2.3563","options":{"max_supply":1000000000,"market_fee_percent":0,"max_market_fee":0,"issuer_permissions":79,"flags":0,"core_exchange_rate":{"base":{"amount":100000,"asset_id":"1.3.0"},"quote":{"amount":10000,"asset_id":"1.3.330"}},"whitelist_authorities":[],"blacklist_authorities":[],"whitelist_markets":[],"blacklist_markets":[],"description":"{\"main\":\"\",\"market\":\"\"}","extensions":{}},"dynamic_asset_data_id":"2.3.330","buyback_account":"1.2.3564","creation_block_num":10660593,"creation_time":"2017-09-01T07:44:54"} for buyback account {"id":"1.2.3564","membership_expiration_date":"1970-01-01T00:00:00","registrar":"1.2.17","referrer":"1.2.17","lifetime_referrer":"1.2.17","network_fee_percentage":2000,"lifetime_referrer_fee_percentage":3000,"referrer_rewards_percentage":3,"name":"special-account","owner":{"weight_threshold":1,"account_auths":[["1.2.3",1]],"key_auths":[],"address_auths":[]},"active":{"weight_threshold":1,"account_auths":[["1.2.3",1]],"key_auths":[],"address_auths":[]},"options":{"memo_key":"TEST7H976gDkY4PkUTpLTDNjYL8u7n9fP9X4qgi4rbArYRS7srxUqE","voting_account":"1.2.5","num_witness":0,"num_committee":0,"votes":[],"extensions":[]},"num_committee_voted":0,"statistics":"2.6.3564","whitelisting_accounts":[],"blacklisting_accounts":[],"whitelisted_accounts":[],"blacklisted_accounts":[],"owner_special_authority":[0,{}],"active_special_authority":[0,{}],"top_n_control_flags":0,"allowed_assets":["1.3.329","1.3.330"],"creation_block_num":10660894,"creation_time":"2017-09-01T08:03:45"} at block 61978003; exception was 10 assert_exception: Assert Exception is_authorized_asset( d, *fee_paying_account, *fee_asset ): Account 1.2.3564 'special-account' attempted to pay fee by using asset 1.3.0 'TEST', which is unauthorized due to whitelist / blacklist

Like failed proposals, I think we should not list these orders in account history (see https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/481 and https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/commit/7e0e58f4411457472f2a407b4c675482bb8dbfc9). Note that existing operation history IDs (1.11.x) should remain unchanged (see https://github.com/cryptonomex/graphene/issues/483 and https://github.com/bitshares/bitshares-core/commit/7cae3501f8120b23ef143d0baa3abfe413d4dbf4).

Strictly speaking, fixing this issue does not change consensus. However, in order to preserve the existing operations history IDs, we need to fix this issue in a consensus upgrade.

Impacts Describe which portion(s) of BitShares Core may be impacted by this bug. Please tick at least one box.

Host Environment Please provide details about the host environment. Much of this information can be found running: witness_node --version.

CORE TEAM TASK LIST