Skip to content
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

Check for stale stakes #151

Open
taco-paco opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Check for stale stakes #151

taco-paco opened this issue Jan 24, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@taco-paco
Copy link

registryCoordinator.quorumUpdateBlockNumber(uint8(quorumNumbers[i])) + withdrawalDelayBlocks >= referenceBlockNumber,

Hi,
Here the check assumes that update was triggered within RegistryCoordinator::updateOperatorsForQuorum but stakes could also be update from RegistryCoordinator::updateOperators. Shouldn't this be checked against StakeRegistry::operatorStakeHistory?

@samlaf
Copy link
Contributor

samlaf commented Jan 26, 2024

Don't have full context here but will give you my partial answer to move this along, and leave those with more context (@8sunyuan ?) to give you a full answer.

I think the goal here is just to make sure that the FULL operator set (for a quorum) has been updated within a given period (which is what updateOperatorsForQuorum does). The goal is not to make sure no one has called the update function in the given period, but oppositely to make sure someone did call it during some bounded period of time.

updateOperators is meant to be called by operators themselves, who are willing to pay the gas costs to update their position in the AVS (perhaps because they received a lot of deposits and don't want to wait for the next full quorum update). It's fine if it happens, and doesn't affect the checkSignature logic because we are referring to a snapshop of operatorState at a given block in the past (before the update).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants