Added ability to run without signature verification #94
Conversation
mm-zk
requested review from
MexicanAce,
uF4No and
dutterbutter
as code owners
| /// @notice Validation that the ECDSA signature of the transaction is correct. | ||
| /// @param _hash The hash of the transaction to be signed. | ||
| /// @param _signature The signature of the transaction. | ||
| /// @return EIP1271_SUCCESS_RETURN_VALUE if the signaure is correct. It reverts otherwise. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should these comments reflect the body comment?
| let system_contracts_options = if opt.dev_use_local_contracts { | ||
| system_contracts::Options::Local | ||
| } else { | ||
| system_contracts::Options::BuiltIn | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Might be missing this but how does one specify to make use of BuiltInWithoutSecurity option?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Currently it only works if you include era-test-node as a library:
https://github.com/mm-zk/revm_era/blob/master/src/lib.rs#L223
We might add it as a command line option in the future for the era-test-node binary. (but that would be a separate PR)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's make a GitHub Issue to track adding an option to use BuiltInWithoutSecurity from the binary
| let system_contracts_options = if opt.dev_use_local_contracts { | ||
| system_contracts::Options::Local | ||
| } else { | ||
| system_contracts::Options::BuiltIn | ||
| }; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's make a GitHub Issue to track adding an option to use BuiltInWithoutSecurity from the binary
What 💻
Why ✋
Evidence 📷
Include screenshots, screen recordings, or
consoleoutput here demonstrating that your changes work as intended