fix: data contract proof doesn't work with new auto fields

[shumkov]

Issue being fixed or feature implemented

When we added auto generated fields to data contract, the proof logic that uses full equality doesn't work anymore, because on client side autogenerated fields are empty.

What was done?

• Compare without auto fields

How Has This Been Tested?

None

Breaking Changes

None

Checklist:

• I have performed a self-review of my own code
• I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
• I have added or updated relevant unit/integration/functional/e2e tests
• I have added "!" to the title and described breaking changes in the corresponding section if my code contains any
• I have made corresponding changes to the documentation if needed

For repository code-owners and collaborators only

• I have assigned this pull request to a milestone

Summary by CodeRabbit

• New Features

  • Introduced a new comparison method for contract data that excludes transient, auto-generated fields.

• Refactor

  • Updated the state transition verification logic to use the enhanced comparison method for more reliable contract evaluations.

[coderabbitai]

Walkthrough

This PR adds a new public method eq_without_auto_fields to the DataContractInSerializationFormat enum, enabling comparison of contracts while ignoring select auto-generated fields. The method handles both V0 and V1 contracts using pattern matching. Additionally, the PR updates a conditional check in the state transition verification logic to utilize this new method for comparing the serialized contract with its expected state. No changes were made to public entity declarations beyond the added method.

Changes

File	Summary
packages/rs-dpp/.../mod.rs	Added public method eq_without_auto_fields to compare contracts while ignoring auto-generated fields using pattern matching for V0 and V1.
packages/rs-drive/.../v0/mod.rs	Modified the conditional check in state transition verification to use eq_without_auto_fields for contract equality comparison.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Verifier
    participant ContractSerialization
    participant ExpectedContract

    Verifier->>ContractSerialization: Retrieve serialized contract
    Verifier->>ExpectedContract: Retrieve expected data contract
    Verifier->>ContractSerialization: Call eq_without_auto_fields(expected data contract)
    ContractSerialization-->>Verifier: Return boolean result
    alt Equality check passes
        Verifier->>Verifier: Handle ProofError::IncorrectProof
    else
        Verifier->>Verifier: Continue processing state transition
    end

Loading

Possibly related PRs

• fix(drive-abci): rebroadcasting should not only take first 2 quorums too #2425: The changes in the main PR are directly related as both involve the use of the eq_without_auto_fields method for comparing instances of data contracts.
• test: fix token history contract tests #2470: This PR modifies a conditional check for contract equality using the eq_without_auto_fields method introduced in the main PR.
• test: fix fetchProofForStateTransition tests and warnings #2460: The new method eq_without_auto_fields is utilized in the conditional check within the state transition verification logic, indicating a direct code-level connection.

Suggested reviewers

• QuantumExplorer

Poem

In the code warren where ideas play,
I hopped through changes in a joyful way.
A method emerged to compare and align,
Ignoring auto fields, so perfect and fine.
With every line, my bunny heart sings—
CodeRabbit’s delight as innovation springs!
(_/)(•_•)(> <) Hop along for brighter springs!

Tip

⚡🧪 Multi-step agentic review comment chat (experimental)

• We're introducing multi-step agentic chat in review comments. This experimental feature enhances review discussions with the CodeRabbit agentic chat by enabling advanced interactions, including the ability to create pull requests directly from comments.
  - To enable this feature, set early_access to true under in the settings.

---

📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 500d057 and 7ab3ba8.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)

• packages/rs-drive/src/verify/state_transition/verify_state_transition_was_executed_with_proof/v0/mod.rs (1 hunks)

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

• packages/rs-drive/src/verify/state_transition/verify_state_transition_was_executed_with_proof/v0/mod.rs

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (19)

• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Formatting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Formatting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Unused dependencies
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (wasm-dpp) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (wasm-dpp) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Build Docker images (Dashmate helper, dashmate-helper, dashmate-helper) / Build Dashmate helper image
• GitHub Check: Build Docker images (Drive, drive, drive-abci) / Build Drive image
• GitHub Check: Build JS packages / Build JS

---

🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

• Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
  • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
  • Generate unit testing code for this file.
  • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
• Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
  • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
• PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
  • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
  • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
  • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
  • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

• @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
• @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
• @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
• @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
• @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
• @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
• @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
• @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
• @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

• Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
• Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
• Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

• You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
• Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
• If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

• Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
• Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
• Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

[coderabbitai]

Actionable comments posted: 1

🔭 Outside diff range comments (1)

packages/rs-drive/src/verify/state_transition/verify_state_transition_was_executed_with_proof/v0/mod.rs (1)

109-111: ⚠️ Potential issue

Missing auto fields handling in DataContractUpdate case

While the DataContractCreate case was updated to use eq_without_auto_fields, this DataContractUpdate case still uses direct comparison (!=). This inconsistency could lead to the same auto-generated fields issue in this context.

-if &contract_for_serialization != data_contract_update.data_contract() {
+if !contract_for_serialization.eq_without_auto_fields(data_contract_update.data_contract()) {
    return Err(Error::Proof(ProofError::IncorrectProof(format!("proof of state transition execution did not contain exact expected contract after update with id {}", data_contract_update.data_contract().id()))));
}

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 7b569ab and 500d057.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

• packages/rs-dpp/src/data_contract/serialized_version/mod.rs (1 hunks)
• packages/rs-drive/src/verify/state_transition/verify_state_transition_was_executed_with_proof/v0/mod.rs (1 hunks)

⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (20)

• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive) / Unused dependencies
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Unused dependencies
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (drive-abci) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (wasm-dpp) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Tests
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (wasm-dpp) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Check each feature
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Unused dependencies
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dash-sdk) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Rust packages (dpp) / Linting
• GitHub Check: Build Docker images (DAPI, dapi, dapi) / Build DAPI image
• GitHub Check: Build Docker images (Dashmate helper, dashmate-helper, dashmate-helper) / Build Dashmate helper image
• GitHub Check: Build Docker images (Drive, drive, drive-abci) / Build Drive image
• GitHub Check: Rust crates security audit
• GitHub Check: Build JS packages / Build JS

🔇 Additional comments (1)

packages/rs-dpp/src/data_contract/serialized_version/mod.rs (1)

100-129: Great addition of the eq_without_auto_fields method

The implementation correctly addresses the PR's objective of excluding auto-generated fields during data contract comparisons. The method handles both V0 and V1 format versions appropriately, with V0 using direct equality and V1 explicitly comparing only the necessary fields.

The explicit handling of cross-version comparisons returning false is also a good safeguard.