1d9bf73b50
* initial commit for rules page * initial commit for updating rules page * tidy up and links * Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Martin Holst Swende <martin@swende.se> * Update docs/_clef/Rules.md * Update docs/_clef/Rules.md Co-authored-by: Martin Holst Swende <martin@swende.se>
325 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
325 lines
12 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
title: Rules
|
||
sort_key: C
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
This page provides a fairly low-level explanation for how rules are implemented in
|
||
Clef. It is a good idea to read the [Introduction to Clef](/docs/clef/introduction)
|
||
and the [Clef tutorial](/docs/clef/tutorial) before diving in to this page.
|
||
|
||
{:toc}
|
||
- this will be removed by the toc
|
||
|
||
## Introduction
|
||
|
||
Rules in Clef are sets of conditions that determine whether a given action can be
|
||
approved automatically without requiring manual intervention from the user. This can be
|
||
useful for automatically approving transactions between a user's own accounts, or
|
||
approving patterns that are commonly used by applications. Automatic signing also
|
||
requires Clef to have access to account passwords which is configured independently
|
||
of the ruleset.
|
||
|
||
Rules can define arbitrary conditions such as:
|
||
|
||
* Auto-approve 10 transactions with contract `CasinoDapp`, with value between `0.05 ether` and
|
||
`1 ether` per 24h period.
|
||
|
||
* Auto-approve transactions to contract `Uniswapv2` with `value` up to 1 ether, if
|
||
`gas < 44k` and `gasPrice < 40Gwei`.
|
||
|
||
* Auto-approve signing if the data to be signed contains the string `"approve_me"`.
|
||
|
||
* Auto-approve any requests to list accounts in keystore if the request arrives over IPC
|
||
|
||
Because the rules are Javascript files they can be customized to implement any arbitrary logic on
|
||
the available request data.
|
||
|
||
This page will explain how rules are implemented in Clef and how best to manage credentials
|
||
when automatic rulesets are enabled.
|
||
|
||
## Rule Implementation
|
||
|
||
|
||
The ruleset engine acts as a gatekeeper to the command line interface - it auto-approves
|
||
any requests that meet the conditions defined in a set of authenticated rule files. This
|
||
prevents the user from having to manually approve or reject every request - instead they
|
||
can define common patterns in a rule file and abstract that task away to the ruleset engine.
|
||
The general architecture is as follows:
|
||
|
||
![Clef ruleset logic](/static/images/clef_ruleset.png)
|
||
|
||
When Clef receives a request, the ruleset engine evaluates a Javascript file for
|
||
each method defined in the internal [UI API docs](/docs/clef/apis). For example the code
|
||
snippet below is an example ruleset that calls the function `ApproveTx`. The call to `ApproveTx`
|
||
is invoking the `ui_approveTx` [JSON_RPC API endpoint](/docs/clef/apis/#ui-api). Every time an RPC
|
||
method is invoked the Javascript code is executed in a freshly instantiated virtual machine.
|
||
|
||
```js
|
||
function asBig(str) {
|
||
if (str.slice(0, 2) == "0x") {
|
||
return new BigNumber(str.slice(2), 16)
|
||
}
|
||
return new BigNumber(str)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Approve transactions to a certain contract if value is below a certain limit
|
||
function ApproveTx(req) {
|
||
var limit = big.Newint("0xb1a2bc2ec50000")
|
||
var value = asBig(req.transaction.value);
|
||
|
||
if (req.transaction.to.toLowerCase() == "0xae967917c465db8578ca9024c205720b1a3651a9") && value.lt(limit)) {
|
||
return "Approve"
|
||
}
|
||
// If we return "Reject", it will be rejected.
|
||
// By not returning anything, the decision to approve/reject
|
||
// will be passed to the next UI, for manual processing
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Approve listings if request made from IPC
|
||
function ApproveListing(req){
|
||
if (req.metadata.scheme == "ipc"){ return "Approve"}
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
When a request is made via the external API, the logic flow is as follows:
|
||
|
||
* Request is made to the `signer` binary using external API
|
||
|
||
* `signer` calls the UI - in this case the ruleset engine
|
||
|
||
* UI evaluates whether the call conforms to rules in an attested rulefile
|
||
|
||
* Assuming the call returns "Approve", request is signed.
|
||
|
||
|
||
There are three possible outcomes from the ruleset engine that are
|
||
handled in different ways:
|
||
|
||
| Return value | Action |
|
||
| ------------------| ----------------------------------------- |
|
||
| "Approve" | Auto-approve request |
|
||
| "Reject" | Auto-reject request |
|
||
| Anything else | Pass decision to UI for manual approval |
|
||
|
||
|
||
There are some additional noteworthy implementation details that are important
|
||
for defining rules correctly in `ruleset.js`:
|
||
|
||
* The code in `ruleset.js` **cannot** load external Javascript files.
|
||
|
||
* The Javascript engine can access `storage` and `console`
|
||
|
||
* The only preloaded library in the Javascript environment is
|
||
`bignumber.js` version `2.0.3`.
|
||
|
||
* Each invocation is made in a fresh virtual machine meaning data cannot be
|
||
stored in global variables between invocations.
|
||
|
||
* Since no global variable storage is available, disk backed `storage` must be
|
||
used - rules should not rely on ephemeral data.
|
||
|
||
* Javascript API parameters are always objects. This ensures parameters are
|
||
accessed by _key_ to avoid misordering errors.
|
||
|
||
* Otto VM uses ES5. ES6-specific features (such as Typed Arrays) are not supported.
|
||
|
||
* The regular expression engine (re2/regexp) in Otto VM is not fully compatible
|
||
with the [ECMA5 specification](https://tc39.es/ecma262/#sec-intro).
|
||
|
||
* [Strict mode](https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/JavaScript/Reference/Strict_mode)
|
||
is not supported. "use strict" will parse but it does nothing.
|
||
|
||
|
||
## Credential management
|
||
|
||
The ability to auto-approve transaction requires that the signer has
|
||
the necessary credentials, i.e. account passwords, to decrypt keyfiles.
|
||
These are stored encrypted as follows:
|
||
|
||
When the `signer` is started it generates a seed that is locked with a
|
||
user specified password. The seed is saved to a location that defaults to
|
||
`$HOME/.clef/masterseed.json`. The `seed` itself is a blob of bytes.
|
||
|
||
The `signer` uses the `seed` to:
|
||
|
||
* Generate the `path` where the configuration and credentials data are stored.
|
||
* `$HOME/.clef/790046d38025/config.json`
|
||
* `$HOME/.clef/790046d38025/credentials.json`
|
||
* Generate the encryption password for the config and credentials files.
|
||
|
||
`config.json` stores the hashes of any attested rulesets. `credentials.json`
|
||
stores encrypted account passwords. The masterseed is required to decrypt
|
||
these files. The decrypted account passwords can then be used to decrypt keyfiles.
|
||
|
||
## Security
|
||
|
||
### The Javascript VM
|
||
The downside of the very flexible rule implementation included in Clef is
|
||
that the `signer` binary needs to contain a Javascript engine. This is an
|
||
additional attack surface. The only viable attack is for an adversary to
|
||
somehow extract cryptographic keys from memory during the Javascript VM execution.
|
||
The hash-based rule attestation condition means the actual Javascript code
|
||
executed by the Javascript engine is not a viable attack surface -- since if the attacker can control the ruleset, a much simpler
|
||
attack would be to surreptitiously insert an attested "always-approve" rule
|
||
instead of attempting to exploit the Javascript virtual machine. The Javascript
|
||
engine is quite simple to implement and there are currently no known security
|
||
vulnerabilities, not have there been any security problems identified for the
|
||
similar Javascript VM implemented in Geth.
|
||
|
||
### Writing rules
|
||
|
||
Since the user has complete freedom to write custom rules, it is plausible that those rules
|
||
could create unintended security vulnerabilities. This can only really be protected by
|
||
coding very carefully and trying to test rulesets (e.g. on a private testnet) before
|
||
implementing them on a public network.
|
||
|
||
Javascript is very flexible but also easy to write incorrectly. For example, users
|
||
might assume that javascript can handle large integers natively rather than explicitly
|
||
using `bigInt`. This is an error commonly encountered in the Ethereum context when
|
||
users attempt to multiply `gas` by `gasCost`.
|
||
|
||
It’s unclear whether any other language would be more secure - there is alwas the possibility
|
||
of implementing an insecure rule.
|
||
|
||
### File security
|
||
|
||
|
||
### Credential security
|
||
|
||
Clef implements a secure, encrypted vault for storing sensitive data. This vault is
|
||
encrypted using a `masterseed` which the user is responsible for storing and backing
|
||
up safely and securely. Since this `masterseed` is used to decrypt the secure vault,
|
||
and its security is not handled by Clef, it could represent a security vulnerability
|
||
if the user does not implement best practise in keeping it safe.
|
||
|
||
The same is also true for keys. Keys are not stored by Clef, they are only accessed
|
||
using account passwords that Clef does store in its vault. The keys themselves are stored
|
||
in an external `keystore` whose security is the responsibility of the user. If the
|
||
keys are compromised, the account is not safe irrespective of the security benefits
|
||
derived from Clef.
|
||
|
||
## Ruleset examples
|
||
|
||
Below are some examples of `ruleset.js` files.
|
||
|
||
### Example 1: Allow destination
|
||
|
||
```js
|
||
function ApproveTx(r) {
|
||
if (r.transaction.to.toLowerCase() == "0x0000000000000000000000000000000000001337") {
|
||
return "Approve"
|
||
}
|
||
if (r.transaction.to.toLowerCase() == "0x000000000000000000000000000000000000dead") {
|
||
return "Reject"
|
||
}
|
||
// Otherwise goes to manual processing
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Example 2: Allow listing
|
||
|
||
```js
|
||
function ApproveListing() {
|
||
return "Approve"
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
### Example 3: Approve signing data
|
||
|
||
```js
|
||
function ApproveSignData(req) {
|
||
if (req.address.toLowerCase() == "0xd9c9cd5f6779558b6e0ed4e6acf6b1947e7fa1f3") {
|
||
if (req.messages[0].value.indexOf("bazonk") >= 0) {
|
||
return "Approve"
|
||
}
|
||
return "Reject"
|
||
}
|
||
// Otherwise goes to manual processing
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
|
||
### Example 4: Rate-limited window
|
||
|
||
```js
|
||
function big(str) {
|
||
if (str.slice(0, 2) == "0x") {
|
||
return new BigNumber(str.slice(2), 16)
|
||
}
|
||
return new BigNumber(str)
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
// Time window: 1 week
|
||
var window = 1000* 3600*24*7;
|
||
|
||
// Limit : 1 ether
|
||
var limit = new BigNumber("1e18");
|
||
|
||
function isLimitOk(transaction) {
|
||
var value = big(transaction.value)
|
||
// Start of our window function
|
||
var windowstart = new Date().getTime() - window;
|
||
|
||
var txs = [];
|
||
var stored = storage.get('txs');
|
||
|
||
if (stored != "") {
|
||
txs = JSON.parse(stored)
|
||
}
|
||
// First, remove all that have passed out of the time-window
|
||
var newtxs = txs.filter(function(tx){return tx.tstamp > windowstart});
|
||
console.log(txs, newtxs.length);
|
||
|
||
// Secondly, aggregate the current sum
|
||
sum = new BigNumber(0)
|
||
|
||
sum = newtxs.reduce(function(agg, tx){ return big(tx.value).plus(agg)}, sum);
|
||
console.log("ApproveTx > Sum so far", sum);
|
||
console.log("ApproveTx > Requested", value.toNumber());
|
||
|
||
// Would we exceed weekly limit ?
|
||
return sum.plus(value).lt(limit)
|
||
|
||
}
|
||
function ApproveTx(r) {
|
||
if (isLimitOk(r.transaction)) {
|
||
return "Approve"
|
||
}
|
||
return "Nope"
|
||
}
|
||
|
||
/**
|
||
* OnApprovedTx(str) is called when a transaction has been approved and signed. The parameter
|
||
* 'response_str' contains the return value that will be sent to the external caller.
|
||
* The return value from this method is ignore - the reason for having this callback is to allow the
|
||
* ruleset to keep track of approved transactions.
|
||
*
|
||
* When implementing rate-limited rules, this callback should be used.
|
||
* If a rule responds with neither 'Approve' nor 'Reject' - the tx goes to manual processing. If the user
|
||
* then accepts the transaction, this method will be called.
|
||
*
|
||
* TLDR; Use this method to keep track of signed transactions, instead of using the data in ApproveTx.
|
||
*/
|
||
function OnApprovedTx(resp) {
|
||
var value = big(resp.tx.value)
|
||
var txs = []
|
||
// Load stored transactions
|
||
var stored = storage.get('txs');
|
||
if (stored != "") {
|
||
txs = JSON.parse(stored)
|
||
}
|
||
// Add this to the storage
|
||
txs.push({tstamp: new Date().getTime(), value: value});
|
||
storage.put("txs", JSON.stringify(txs));
|
||
}
|
||
```
|
||
|
||
## Summary
|
||
|
||
Rules are sets of conditions encoded in Javascript files that enable certain actions to
|
||
be auto-approved by Clef. This page outlined the implementation details and security
|
||
considerations that will help to build suitrable ruleset files. See the
|
||
[Clef Github](https://github.com/ethereum/go-ethereum/tree/master/cmd/clef) for further reading.
|
||
|
||
|