Allow tx without budget #2846
Allow tx without budget #2846
Conversation
… a command line argument
…g exceptions instead of returning a bool result. Allow updateMintTx and updateBurnTx to ignore the transaction if the owner is someone else
…intTx ignore mints/burns intended for a different user when synchronizing
…returning complete messages occasionaly when getting tx data
…put. Add a simple debug output to inspect the coins of a user
…oy command from utt-wallet-cli
…li. Instead of generating and deploying a config, the configure command will fetch an already deployed configuration by the admin-cli
…tatements in libutt. Fix wallet-cli reading transfer instead of burn response (didn't affect correctness)
…and remove old files
| @@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ class Admin { | |||
| /// [TODO-UTT] Should be performed by an admin app | |||
| /// @brief Deploy a privacy application | |||
| /// @return The public configuration of the deployed application | |||
| static bool deployApp(Channel& chan, bool budget_policy = true); | |||
| static bool deployApp(Channel& chan, bool budget_policy); | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this PR also include a change to the wallet app?
as it checks
const size_t budget = getPrivacyBudget();
if (budget < amount) throw std::runtime_error("User has insufficient privacy budget!");```
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't it more elegant to define the non-budget configuration as a budget coin with infinite value?
It will eliminate the need for if - else on the transaction and will reduce the configuration changes
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's more elegant for the code but will it be more elegant for the system if we still need to create and manage a 'hidden infinite' budget coin? And how does it reduce the configuration changes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think the option to require a budget should be called 'budget_policy', as a budget policy may include more logic than simply turning the budget requirement on or off. Maybe something like 'require_budget' is a bit more appropriate. Also, I don't think we're ready yet to expose this option in the admin when creating a deployment, there needs to be more discussion how this should actually work and what changes will be needed in the wallets as well. For now we can limit ourselves to add a unit test that validates turning the budget requirement off.
yontyon
force-pushed
the
privacy-feature
branch
2 times, most recently
from
cfe5ba1 to
dbadd68
Compare
Allow a non-budgeted transaction.
The servers validate the budget coin's presence according to a configuration. The client should create the transaction with budget coin also according to the same configuration.
unitests in libutt and client api