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

[Polkadot Wiki Migration] Secure Your Node #47

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

CrackTheCode016
Copy link
Collaborator

@CrackTheCode016 CrackTheCode016 commented Sep 19, 2024

Copy link

@github-actions github-actions bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Remaining comments which cannot be posted as a review comment to avoid GitHub Rate Limit

vale

infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|112 col 69| [Vale.Avoid] Avoid using 'we'.
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|117 col 28| [Google.We] Try to avoid using first-person plural like 'we'.
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|117 col 28| [Vale.Avoid] Avoid using 'we'.
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|121 col 60| [Papermoon.NotContractions] Use 'shouldn't' instead of 'should not'.
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|124 col 63| [Papermoon.CustomDictionary] Did you really mean 'VMs'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|124 col 63| [Vale.Spelling] Did you really mean 'VMs'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|125 col 85| [Papermoon.CustomDictionary] Did you really mean 'VMs'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|125 col 85| [Vale.Spelling] Did you really mean 'VMs'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|145 col 4| [Papermoon.CustomDictionary] Did you really mean 'Certus'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|145 col 4| [Vale.Spelling] Did you really mean 'Certus'?
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|146 col 4| [Papermoon.Acronyms] Spell out 'EOS', if it's unfamiliar to the audience.
infrastructure/validators/onboarding/run-validator/secure-node.md|147 col 4| [Papermoon.Acronyms] Spell out 'HSM', if it's unfamiliar to the audience.

@CrackTheCode016
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Will someone who knows this stuff to review properly

Session keys are generated inside the node via RPC call. See the [How to Validate guide]() for instructions on setting Session keys. These should be generated and kept within your client. When you generate new Session keys, you must submit an extrinsic (a Session certificate) from your staking proxy key telling the chain your new Session keys.

!!!info "Generating session keys"
Session keys can also be generated outside the client and inserted into the client's keystore via RPC. For most users, it is recommended to use the key generation functionality within the client.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I'd add a reference to that RPC as well.

Also, I'd explain what you mean here with key generation functionality or add a reference somewhere that explains that

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am actually a little confused on what that means too, I assume it is parachain-binary key insert? cc: @DrW3RK

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nvm I misread, I think it refers to the fact that you can generate a key like: parachain-binary OR polkadot-parachain key generation

Either way, this is something that can be put in the main validator guide and linked here later. Will add a todo

CrackTheCode016 and others added 2 commits October 1, 2024 10:19
Co-authored-by: Nicolás Hussein <80422357+nhussein11@users.noreply.github.com>

High availability set-ups that involve redundant validator nodes may seem attractive at first. However, they can be *very dangerous* if they aren't set up perfectly. The reason for this is that the session keys used by a validator should always be isolated to just a single node. Replicating session keys across multiple nodes could lead to equivocation [slashes](TODO:update-path){target=\_blank} or parachain validity slashes which can make you lose **100% of your staked funds**.

The good news is that 100% uptime of your validator isn't really needed, as it has some buffer within eras to go offline for a little while and upgrade. For this reason, it is advised that you only attempt a high availability set-up if *you're confident you know exactly what you're doing.*

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i would say just do not do this, people should never do this

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Might be pertinent to note explicitly if you have two validators online with the same keys you will get slashed

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it would be better just to remove the whole section then? And make a note regarding the same keys being slashed

@CrackTheCode016 CrackTheCode016 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 4, 2024 12:41
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants