-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 898
Problem: keyring-backend test
leading to accounts to be drained when 8545 exposed public
#1657
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
Comments
Referral ticket from |
This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove |
This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove |
This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove |
This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove |
This is a valid feature request. But currently we cannot add it to our priority development queue. |
This issue is stale because it has been open 45 days with no activity. Remove |
Context
https://github.com/evmos/evmos/blob/main/rpc/backend/sign_tx.go L26:29
It is implementation of
eth_sendTransaction
With keyring-backend
test
, which is not protected by password, everyone able to drain all balance of all accounts managed under keyring-backendtest
of the node just by sending a transfer command like this:And list of accounts managed by node can be retrievable by calling: eth_accounts
Fact is I got drained 10+ times but I didn't mind about that because most of the time I just set it up testing smt and eraser so got drained is not any problem.
10/10 times I got drained by this wallet
0x071aad74a52f76aec4a4b4fecfc910dbc8fe03f4
(it is well-known)In this github ticket I see they mentioned about the
allow-insecure-unlock
flag (which I believe not exists in current implementation of evmos/ethermint).So why don't we implement that flag?
So balance of test chains still safe unless that flag
--allow-insecure-unlock
supplied within start command.With
--allow-insecure-unlock
supplied, the un-safe methods like that can be accessible.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: