Safer intent GetOutpoints #802

louisinger · 2025-11-10T09:20:46Z

Make sure RegisterIntent fails in case of zero-input psbt is passed.

@altafan please review

Summary by CodeRabbit

Bug Fixes
- Strengthened validation to reject intents whose proofs lack transaction inputs, preventing invalid requests from progressing and avoiding downstream errors.
Tests
- Added unit tests covering proofs with zero or one input to ensure no outpoints are produced and validation behaves correctly.

coderabbitai · 2025-11-10T09:20:55Z

Walkthrough

RegisterIntent now rejects proofs that contain no inputs. Proof.GetOutpoints returns an empty slice when a PSBT has one or zero inputs. Tests added for GetOutpoints covering zero- and one-input PSBTs.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Service input validation `internal/core/application/service.go`	RegisterIntent now returns an INVALID_INTENT_PSBT error when the proof yields zero outpoints (proof has no inputs); error includes PsbtMetadata with the proof TxID.
Proof outpoint guard `pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go`	Proof.GetOutpoints gains an early guard: when UnsignedTx has ≤1 inputs it returns an empty slice (avoids zero/negative-capacity slice allocation).
Unit tests `pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof_test.go`	New tests (TestGetOutpoints) asserting GetOutpoints returns empty slice for PSBTs with zero and one input.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Service as RegisterIntent
    participant Proof as Proof.GetOutpoints
    participant DB as IntentStore

    Service->>Proof: call GetOutpoints(proof)
    alt UnsignedTx inputs ≤ 1
        Proof-->>Service: return []
        Service->>Service: return INVALID_INTENT_PSBT (proof misses inputs, include TxID)
    else UnsignedTx inputs > 1
        Proof-->>Service: return outpoints[]
        Service->>DB: continue intent registration with outpoints
        DB-->>Service: ack
        Service-->>Client: success
    end

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

Small, focused logic changes and one new unit test.
Pay attention to error message/content and PsbtMetadata TxID inclusion.
Verify test covers both zero and one input cases and that no other callers rely on prior GetOutpoints behavior.

Possibly related PRs

Intents: add sanity checks on TapLeafScript input fields #749: Also modifies RegisterIntent PSBT validations (adds per-input TapLeafScript checks) — overlaps on intent PSBT validation logic.
Improve TestCollaborativeExit coverage #775: Adjusts RegisterIntent PSBT/inputs validation and error handling — related to input/outpoint validation changes.
Intent proof of ownership rework #722: Previously touched intent.Proof.GetOutpoints logic — directly related to the guard added here.

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	You can run `@coderabbitai generate docstrings` to improve docstring coverage.

✅ Passed checks (2 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'Safer intent GetOutpoints' accurately describes the main change: adding validation to prevent zero-input PSBTs from being processed, making the GetOutpoints logic safer.

✨ Finishing touches

📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch getoutpoint-fix

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between e02dd66 and 0a6f482.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

internal/core/application/service.go (1 hunks)
pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1 hunks)
pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof_test.go (1 hunks)

🧰 Additional context used

🧬 Code graph analysis (2)

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof_test.go (1)

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1)

Proof (41-43)

internal/core/application/service.go (2)

pkg/errors/errors.go (2)

INVALID_INTENT_PSBT (290-290)

PsbtMetadata (111-113)

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1)

New (136-160)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (3)

GitHub Check: unit tests
GitHub Check: integration tests
GitHub Check: Build and Scan

🔇 Additional comments (2)

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1)

165-167: LGTM: Proper guard against insufficient inputs.

The guard correctly handles edge cases where the PSBT has no inputs or only the toSpend input. Since the first input is always the toSpend transaction (as verified in the Verify function), returning an empty slice when len(p.UnsignedTx.TxIn) <= 1 is the appropriate behavior.

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof_test.go (1)

11-33: LGTM: Well-structured tests for edge cases.

The tests properly cover the boundary conditions:

Zero inputs: validates that an empty PSBT returns no outpoints

One input: validates that a PSBT with only the toSpend input returns no outpoints

These tests ensure the guard clause in GetOutpoints() works correctly.

internal/core/application/service.go

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 0

🧹 Nitpick comments (1)

pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1)
165-167: LGTM! Defensive guard prevents panic and aligns with validation logic.

This guard correctly handles edge cases where the PSBT has insufficient inputs. Since input 0 is the toSpend transaction, returning nil when len <= 1 accurately reflects that no real user inputs exist. It also prevents a panic at line 168 when len == 0 would cause a negative slice capacity.

Optional: Enhance method documentation for clarity.

Consider updating the method comment to explicitly document the nil return case:
 // GetOutpoints returns the list of inputs proving ownership of coins
-// the first input is the toSpend tx, we ignore it
+// the first input is the toSpend tx, we ignore it.
+// Returns nil if there are no real user inputs (0 or 1 total inputs).
 func (p Proof) GetOutpoints() []wire.OutPoint {

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 0a6f482 and 73d45ef.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

internal/core/application/service.go (1 hunks)
pkg/ark-lib/intent/proof.go (1 hunks)

🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)

internal/core/application/service.go

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (3)

GitHub Check: Build and Scan
GitHub Check: integration tests
GitHub Check: unit tests

fix proof.GetOutpoints()

0a6f482

coderabbitai bot reviewed Nov 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

internal/core/application/service.go Show resolved Hide resolved

Fixes

73d45ef

coderabbitai bot reviewed Nov 10, 2025

View reviewed changes

altafan merged commit 057a77f into master Nov 10, 2025
5 checks passed

coderabbitai bot mentioned this pull request Nov 11, 2025

Unit test ark-lib/intent #805

Open

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Safer intent GetOutpoints #802

Safer intent GetOutpoints #802

Uh oh!

louisinger commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Safer intent GetOutpoints #802

Safer intent GetOutpoints #802

Uh oh!

Conversation

louisinger commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited by coderabbitai bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 10, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Sequence Diagram(s)

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related PRs

Pre-merge checks and finishing touches

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

louisinger commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited by coderabbitai bot

Loading

coderabbitai bot commented Nov 10, 2025 •

edited

Loading