Merge pull request #1861 from TheBlueMatt/2022-11-tx-connection-idempotency

Ensure transactions_confirmed is idempotent

lightning/src/chain/channelmonitor.rs

@@ -826,6 +826,13 @@ pub(crate) struct ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer: Sign> {
 	/// spending CSV for revocable outputs).
 	htlcs_resolved_on_chain: Vec<IrrevocablyResolvedHTLC>,
 
+	/// The set of `SpendableOutput` events which we have already passed upstream to be claimed.
+	/// These are tracked explicitly to ensure that we don't generate the same events redundantly
+	/// if users duplicatively confirm old transactions. Specifically for transactions claiming a
+	/// revoked remote outpoint we otherwise have no tracking at all once they've reached
+	/// [`ANTI_REORG_DELAY`], so we have to track them here.
+	spendable_txids_confirmed: Vec<Txid>,
+
 	// We simply modify best_block in Channel's block_connected so that serialization is
 	// consistent but hopefully the users' copy handles block_connected in a consistent way.
 	// (we do *not*, however, update them in update_monitor to ensure any local user copies keep
@@ -1071,6 +1078,7 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> Writeable for ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 			(7, self.funding_spend_seen, required),
 			(9, self.counterparty_node_id, option),
 			(11, self.confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output, option),
+			(13, self.spendable_txids_confirmed, vec_type),
 		});
 
 		Ok(())
@@ -1179,6 +1187,7 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitor<Signer> {
 			funding_spend_confirmed: None,
 			confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output: None,
 			htlcs_resolved_on_chain: Vec::new(),
+			spendable_txids_confirmed: Vec::new(),
 
 			best_block,
 			counterparty_node_id: Some(counterparty_node_id),
@@ -2860,7 +2869,37 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 
 		let mut watch_outputs = Vec::new();
 		let mut claimable_outpoints = Vec::new();
-		for tx in &txn_matched {
+		'tx_iter: for tx in &txn_matched {
+			let txid = tx.txid();
+			// If a transaction has already been confirmed, ensure we don't bother processing it duplicatively.
+			if Some(txid) == self.funding_spend_confirmed {
+				log_debug!(logger, "Skipping redundant processing of funding-spend tx {} as it was previously confirmed", txid);
+				continue 'tx_iter;
+			}
+			for ev in self.onchain_events_awaiting_threshold_conf.iter() {
+				if ev.txid == txid {
+					if let Some(conf_hash) = ev.block_hash {
+						assert_eq!(header.block_hash(), conf_hash,
+							"Transaction {} was already confirmed and is being re-confirmed in a different block.\n\
+							This indicates a severe bug in the transaction connection logic - a reorg should have been processed first!", ev.txid);
+					}
+					log_debug!(logger, "Skipping redundant processing of confirming tx {} as it was previously confirmed", txid);
+					continue 'tx_iter;
+				}
+			}
+			for htlc in self.htlcs_resolved_on_chain.iter() {
+				if Some(txid) == htlc.resolving_txid {
+					log_debug!(logger, "Skipping redundant processing of HTLC resolution tx {} as it was previously confirmed", txid);
+					continue 'tx_iter;
+				}
+			}
+			for spendable_txid in self.spendable_txids_confirmed.iter() {
+				if txid == *spendable_txid {
+					log_debug!(logger, "Skipping redundant processing of spendable tx {} as it was previously confirmed", txid);
+					continue 'tx_iter;
+				}
+			}
+
 			if tx.input.len() == 1 {
 				// Assuming our keys were not leaked (in which case we're screwed no matter what),
 				// commitment transactions and HTLC transactions will all only ever have one input,
@@ -2870,7 +2909,7 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 				if prevout.txid == self.funding_info.0.txid && prevout.vout == self.funding_info.0.index as u32 {
 					let mut balance_spendable_csv = None;
 					log_info!(logger, "Channel {} closed by funding output spend in txid {}.",
-						log_bytes!(self.funding_info.0.to_channel_id()), tx.txid());
+						log_bytes!(self.funding_info.0.to_channel_id()), txid);
 					self.funding_spend_seen = true;
 					let mut commitment_tx_to_counterparty_output = None;
 					if (tx.input[0].sequence.0 >> 8*3) as u8 == 0x80 && (tx.lock_time.0 >> 8*3) as u8 == 0x20 {
@@ -2893,7 +2932,6 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 							}
 						}
 					}
-					let txid = tx.txid();
 					self.onchain_events_awaiting_threshold_conf.push(OnchainEventEntry {
 						txid,
 						transaction: Some((*tx).clone()),
@@ -3042,6 +3080,7 @@ impl<Signer: Sign> ChannelMonitorImpl<Signer> {
 					self.pending_events.push(Event::SpendableOutputs {
 						outputs: vec![descriptor]
 					});
+					self.spendable_txids_confirmed.push(entry.txid);
 				},
 				OnchainEvent::HTLCSpendConfirmation { commitment_tx_output_idx, preimage, .. } => {
 					self.htlcs_resolved_on_chain.push(IrrevocablyResolvedHTLC {
@@ -3777,6 +3816,7 @@ impl<'a, K: KeysInterface> ReadableArgs<&'a K>
 		let mut funding_spend_seen = Some(false);
 		let mut counterparty_node_id = None;
 		let mut confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output = None;
+		let mut spendable_txids_confirmed = Some(Vec::new());
 		read_tlv_fields!(reader, {
 			(1, funding_spend_confirmed, option),
 			(3, htlcs_resolved_on_chain, vec_type),
@@ -3784,6 +3824,7 @@ impl<'a, K: KeysInterface> ReadableArgs<&'a K>
 			(7, funding_spend_seen, option),
 			(9, counterparty_node_id, option),
 			(11, confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output, option),
+			(13, spendable_txids_confirmed, vec_type),
 		});
 
 		let mut secp_ctx = Secp256k1::new();
@@ -3836,6 +3877,7 @@ impl<'a, K: KeysInterface> ReadableArgs<&'a K>
 			funding_spend_confirmed,
 			confirmed_commitment_tx_counterparty_output,
 			htlcs_resolved_on_chain: htlcs_resolved_on_chain.unwrap(),
+			spendable_txids_confirmed: spendable_txids_confirmed.unwrap(),
 
 			best_block,
 			counterparty_node_id,

lightning/src/ln/functional_test_utils.rs

@@ -107,6 +107,14 @@ pub enum ConnectStyle {
 	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
 	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call.
 	TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
+	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
+	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call. Further, we call `transactions_confirmed` multiple
+	/// times to ensure it's idempotent.
+	TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks,
+	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst`, however when we have multiple blocks to connect, we only
+	/// make a single `best_block_updated` call. Further, we call `transactions_confirmed` multiple
+	/// times to ensure it's idempotent.
+	HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
 	/// The same as `TransactionsFirst` when connecting blocks. During disconnection only
 	/// `transaction_unconfirmed` is called.
 	TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
@@ -121,14 +129,16 @@ impl ConnectStyle {
 			use core::hash::{BuildHasher, Hasher};
 			// Get a random value using the only std API to do so - the DefaultHasher
 			let rand_val = std::collections::hash_map::RandomState::new().build_hasher().finish();
-			let res = match rand_val % 7 {
+			let res = match rand_val % 9 {
 				0 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirst,
 				1 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks,
 				2 => ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
 				3 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst,
 				4 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
-				5 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
+				5 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks,
-				6 => ConnectStyle::FullBlockViaListen,
+				6 => ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks,
+				7 => ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip,
+				8 => ConnectStyle::FullBlockViaListen,
 				_ => unreachable!(),
 			};
 			eprintln!("Using Block Connection Style: {:?}", res);
@@ -143,6 +153,7 @@ impl ConnectStyle {
 pub fn connect_blocks<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, depth: u32) -> BlockHash {
 	let skip_intermediaries = match *node.connect_style.borrow() {
 		ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
 			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstReorgsOnlyTip|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => true,
 		_ => false,
 	};
@@ -193,8 +204,32 @@ fn do_connect_block<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, block: Block, sk
 				node.node.best_block_updated(&block.header, height);
 				node.node.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
 			},
-			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => {
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirst|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstReorgsOnlyTip => {
+				if *node.connect_style.borrow() == ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks {
+					let mut connections = Vec::new();
+					for (block, height) in node.blocks.lock().unwrap().iter() {
+						if !block.txdata.is_empty() {
+							// Reconnect all transactions we've ever seen to ensure transaction connection
+							// is *really* idempotent. This is a somewhat likely deployment for some
+							// esplora implementations of chain sync which try to reduce state and
+							// complexity as much as possible.
+							//
+							// Sadly we have to clone the block here to maintain lockorder. In the
+							// future we should consider Arc'ing the blocks to avoid this.
+							connections.push((block.clone(), *height));
+						}
+					}
+					for (old_block, height) in connections {
+						node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&old_block.header,
+							&old_block.txdata.iter().enumerate().collect::<Vec<_>>(), height);
+					}
+				}
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
+				if *node.connect_style.borrow() == ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks {
+					node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
+				}
 				call_claimable_balances(node);
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.best_block_updated(&block.header, height);
 				node.node.transactions_confirmed(&block.header, &txdata, height);
@@ -226,7 +261,8 @@ pub fn disconnect_blocks<'a, 'b, 'c, 'd>(node: &'a Node<'b, 'c, 'd>, count: u32)
 				node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.block_disconnected(&orig.0.header, orig.1);
 				Listen::block_disconnected(node.node, &orig.0.header, orig.1);
 			},
-			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks => {
+			ConnectStyle::BestBlockFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|
+			ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks|ConnectStyle::TransactionsDuplicativelyFirstSkippingBlocks => {
 				if i == count - 1 {
 					node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.best_block_updated(&prev.0.header, prev.1);
 					node.node.best_block_updated(&prev.0.header, prev.1);

lightning/src/ln/functional_tests.rs

@@ -2814,12 +2814,17 @@ fn test_htlc_on_chain_success() {
 	check_added_monitors!(nodes[1], 1);
 	check_closed_event!(nodes[1], 1, ClosureReason::CommitmentTxConfirmed);
 	let node_txn = nodes[1].tx_broadcaster.txn_broadcasted.lock().unwrap().clone();
-	assert_eq!(node_txn.len(), 6); // ChannelManager : 3 (commitment tx + HTLC-Sucess * 2), ChannelMonitor : 3 (HTLC-Success, 2* RBF bumps of above HTLC txn)
+	assert!(node_txn.len() == 4 || node_txn.len() == 6); // ChannelManager : 3 (commitment tx + HTLC-Sucess * 2), ChannelMonitor : 3 (HTLC-Success, 2* RBF bumps of above HTLC txn)
 	let commitment_spend =
 		if node_txn[0].input[0].previous_output.txid == node_a_commitment_tx[0].txid() {
+			if node_txn.len() == 6 {
+				// In some block `ConnectionStyle`s we may avoid broadcasting the double-spending
+				// transactions spending the HTLC outputs of C's commitment transaction. Otherwise,
+				// check that the extra broadcasts (double-)spend those here.
 				check_spends!(node_txn[1], commitment_tx[0]);
 				check_spends!(node_txn[2], commitment_tx[0]);
 				assert_ne!(node_txn[1].input[0].previous_output.vout, node_txn[2].input[0].previous_output.vout);
+			}
 			&node_txn[0]
 		} else {
 			check_spends!(node_txn[0], commitment_tx[0]);
@@ -2834,10 +2839,11 @@ fn test_htlc_on_chain_success() {
 	assert_eq!(commitment_spend.input[1].witness.last().unwrap().len(), OFFERED_HTLC_SCRIPT_WEIGHT);
 	assert_eq!(commitment_spend.lock_time.0, 0);
 	assert!(commitment_spend.output[0].script_pubkey.is_v0_p2wpkh()); // direct payment
-	check_spends!(node_txn[3], chan_1.3);
+	let funding_spend_offset = if node_txn.len() == 6 { 3 } else { 1 };
-	assert_eq!(node_txn[3].input[0].witness.clone().last().unwrap().len(), 71);
+	check_spends!(node_txn[funding_spend_offset], chan_1.3);
-	check_spends!(node_txn[4], node_txn[3]);
+	assert_eq!(node_txn[funding_spend_offset].input[0].witness.clone().last().unwrap().len(), 71);
-	check_spends!(node_txn[5], node_txn[3]);
+	check_spends!(node_txn[funding_spend_offset + 1], node_txn[funding_spend_offset]);
+	check_spends!(node_txn[funding_spend_offset + 2], node_txn[funding_spend_offset]);
 	// We don't bother to check that B can claim the HTLC output on its commitment tx here as
 	// we already checked the same situation with A.
 
@@ -3370,6 +3376,12 @@ fn test_htlc_ignore_latest_remote_commitment() {
 	let node_cfgs = create_node_cfgs(2, &chanmon_cfgs);
 	let node_chanmgrs = create_node_chanmgrs(2, &node_cfgs, &[None, None]);
 	let nodes = create_network(2, &node_cfgs, &node_chanmgrs);
+	if *nodes[1].connect_style.borrow() == ConnectStyle::FullBlockViaListen {
+		// We rely on the ability to connect a block redundantly, which isn't allowed via
+		// `chain::Listen`, so we never run the test if we randomly get assigned that
+		// connect_style.
+		return;
+	}
 	create_announced_chan_between_nodes(&nodes, 0, 1, channelmanager::provided_init_features(), channelmanager::provided_init_features());
 
 	route_payment(&nodes[0], &[&nodes[1]], 10000000);
@@ -3391,7 +3403,6 @@ fn test_htlc_ignore_latest_remote_commitment() {
 
 	// Duplicate the connect_block call since this may happen due to other listeners
 	// registering new transactions
-	header.prev_blockhash = header.block_hash();
 	connect_block(&nodes[1], &Block { header, txdata: vec![node_txn[0].clone(), node_txn[2].clone()]});
 }
 

lightning/src/ln/monitor_tests.rs

@@ -567,6 +567,16 @@ fn do_test_claim_value_force_close(prev_commitment_tx: bool) {
 	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], ANTI_REORG_DELAY - 1);
 	assert_eq!(Vec::<Balance>::new(),
 		nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances());
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	for node in nodes.iter() {
+		connect_blocks(node, 6);
+		connect_blocks(node, 6);
+		assert!(node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+		assert!(node.chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
+	}
 }
 
 #[test]
@@ -750,6 +760,14 @@ fn test_balances_on_local_commitment_htlcs() {
 	connect_blocks(&nodes[0], node_a_htlc_claimable - nodes[0].best_block_info().1);
 	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 	test_spendable_output(&nodes[0], &as_txn[1]);
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 6);
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 6);
+	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 }
 
 #[test]
@@ -982,6 +1000,14 @@ fn test_no_preimage_inbound_htlc_balances() {
 
 	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 1);
 	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 }
 
 fn sorted_vec_with_additions<T: Ord + Clone>(v_orig: &Vec<T>, extra_ts: &[&T]) -> Vec<T> {
@@ -1231,6 +1257,14 @@ fn do_test_revoked_counterparty_commitment_balances(confirm_htlc_spend_first: bo
 	test_spendable_output(&nodes[1], &claim_txn[1]);
 	expect_payment_failed!(nodes[1], timeout_payment_hash, false);
 	assert_eq!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances(), Vec::new());
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 }
 
 #[test]
@@ -1437,6 +1471,14 @@ fn test_revoked_counterparty_htlc_tx_balances() {
 	test_spendable_output(&nodes[0], &as_second_htlc_claim_tx[1]);
 
 	assert_eq!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances(), Vec::new());
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 6);
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[0], 6);
+	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 }
 
 #[test]
@@ -1628,4 +1670,12 @@ fn test_revoked_counterparty_aggregated_claims() {
 	expect_payment_failed!(nodes[1], revoked_payment_hash, false);
 	test_spendable_output(&nodes[1], &claim_txn_2[0]);
 	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
+
+	// Ensure that even if we connect more blocks, potentially replaying the entire chain if we're
+	// using `ConnectStyle::HighlyRedundantTransactionsFirstSkippingBlocks`, we don't get new
+	// monitor events or claimable balances.
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	connect_blocks(&nodes[1], 6);
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());
+	assert!(nodes[1].chain_monitor.chain_monitor.get_monitor(funding_outpoint).unwrap().get_claimable_balances().is_empty());
 }

lightning/src/ln/payment_tests.rs

@@ -786,8 +786,9 @@ fn do_test_dup_htlc_onchain_fails_on_reload(persist_manager_post_event: bool, co
 	let funding_txo = OutPoint { txid: funding_tx.txid(), index: 0 };
 	let mon_updates: Vec<_> = chanmon_cfgs[0].persister.chain_sync_monitor_persistences.lock().unwrap()
 		.get_mut(&funding_txo).unwrap().drain().collect();
-	// If we are using chain::Confirm instead of chain::Listen, we will get the same update twice
+	// If we are using chain::Confirm instead of chain::Listen, we will get the same update twice.
-	assert!(mon_updates.len() == 1 || mon_updates.len() == 2);
+	// If we're testing connection idempotency we may get substantially more.
+	assert!(mon_updates.len() >= 1);
 	assert!(nodes[0].chain_monitor.release_pending_monitor_events().is_empty());
 	assert!(nodes[0].node.get_and_clear_pending_events().is_empty());