-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 220
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
make TimerService closely held by contracts: remove from terms, Board, home
object
#5799
Comments
I would also want to add a standard check, whenever a TimerService was included in privateArgs, that the TimerService matched the TimerIdentity. Governance handles this kind of thing for Invitations that are governed parameters, but there is little likelihood of wanting the TimerService to be a governed parameter, so it would have to be a parallel utility. |
Less coding solution: move timer from terms to private args. |
The main tasks are:
|
I learned this week that in order to make an offer with an For our hackathon project, the only way we figured out how to do that via the smart wallet was to put it on the board. Looks like addressing that is in scope here.
|
What is the Problem Being Solved?
If we implement #5798 , then the second step is to remove access to the full-powered TimerService, by doing the following:
chainServices
supplied to newly-provisioned ag-solo clients, replacing it with the identityeval()
operation)A deeper change, which I think is interesting (but I don't know how much work would be involved) would be to define an Amount-like
{ time, timerID }
structure, maybe usingAmountMath.Nat
to manipulate it, and change all timer-sensitive contracts (at least the Vault, which needs to compute interest on a particular schedule) to use them. That would remove the TimerID from the contract's terms, and instead include it in each time value that crosses its API.Description of the Design
Security Considerations
Test Plan
This probably requires updates to the existing unit tests for the components being changed, but maybe not brand new tests, unless we go with the Amount-like "typed-Time" structure.
cc @Chris-Hibbert
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: