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

internal/ethapi: use correct signer when serving old blocks #23683

Merged
merged 3 commits into from Oct 7, 2021

Conversation

s1na
Copy link
Contributor

@s1na s1na commented Oct 5, 2021

Fixes #23681

After the fix I get the address 0x6d6d02e83c4ced98204e20126acf27e9d87b8af2 for the tx mentioned in the ticket which agrees with etherscan

Comment on lines 1297 to 1303
// First reply protection (EIP155) was a part of Spurious Dragon.
// Need to distinguish the two HFs because Homestead rejects a subset of S values.
if config.IsHomestead(big.NewInt(0).SetUint64(blockNumber)) {
signer = types.HomesteadSigner{}
} else {
signer = types.FrontierSigner{}
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Shouldn't we replace this entire thing (including the clause above) with

signer = types.MakeSigner(config, blockNumber)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Fixed

@fjl fjl changed the title eth,internal: use correct signer when serving old blocks internal/ethapi: use correct signer when serving old blocks Oct 7, 2021
@fjl fjl added this to the 1.10.10 milestone Oct 7, 2021
@fjl fjl merged commit 48496e0 into ethereum:master Oct 7, 2021
sidhujag pushed a commit to syscoin/go-ethereum that referenced this pull request Oct 7, 2021
…#23683)

Fixes ethereum#23681

After the fix I get the address 0x6d6d02e83c4ced98204e20126acf27e9d87b8af2 for the
tx mentioned in the ticket, which agrees with etherscan.
yongjun925 pushed a commit to DODOEX/go-ethereum that referenced this pull request Dec 3, 2022
…#23683)

Fixes ethereum#23681

After the fix I get the address 0x6d6d02e83c4ced98204e20126acf27e9d87b8af2 for the
tx mentioned in the ticket, which agrees with etherscan.
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

From address for some transactions is 0x0 address (0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000)
3 participants