Skip to content

SIMD-0186: Clarify program/loader validation #311

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
+33 −0
Open

SIMD-0186: Clarify program/loader validation #311

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
5f4dd69
SIMD-0186: Clarify program/loader validation
2501babe Jun 26, 2025
768ca93
edits
2501babe Jun 27, 2025
52c4a8e
edits
2501babe Jul 29, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
29 changes: 29 additions & 0 deletions proposals/0186-loaded-transaction-data-size-specification.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -114,6 +114,35 @@ Account size for programs owned by LoaderV4 is left undefined. This SIMD should
be amended to define the required semantics before LoaderV4 is enabled on any
network.

### Sidebar: Program ID and Loader Validation

After all accounts are loaded, if the transaction's size comes at or under its
loaded accounts data size limit, the program IDs of each instruction, along with
their program owners, are validated. This process is unrelated to the rest of
this SIMD, but is not defined elsewhere, so we define it here.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think it's fair to say that it is related to this SIMD because now that we don't need to load the owner account to track its size, we are able to make this simplification.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ill reword it, im trying to adhere to the philosophy that the simd document is primary and the solana validators are concrete implementations of the simd. its unrelated in the sense that this simd is exclusively about how sizes are determined so the validation is sort of a tangent


The process is as follows; for each instruction's program ID:

* Verify the account exists.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we add the expected error for this check? (ProgramAccountNotFound)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

52c4a8e

* If [SIMD-0162](
https://github.com/solana-foundation/solana-improvement-documents/pull/162)
has not been activated, verify the program account is marked executable. When
SIMD-0162 is active, skip this step.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nit: SIMD-0162 is activated on all clusters so we can remove this now

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

52c4a8e

* Verify the program account's owner is one of:
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same here, can you add the expected error if this check fails? (InvalidProgramForExecution)

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

52c4a8e

* `NativeLoader1111111111111111111111111111111`
* `BPFLoader1111111111111111111111111111111111`
* `BPFLoader2111111111111111111111111111111111`
* `BPFLoaderUpgradeab1e11111111111111111111111`
* `LoaderV411111111111111111111111111111111111`

If any of these conditions are violated, loading is aborted and the transaction
pays fees.

Previously, these checks were skipped if the program ID was
`NativeLoader1111111111111111111111111111111` itself. This special case has been
removed, and `NativeLoader1111111111111111111111111111111` behaves like any
other account.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think we should also say that previously the program id's owner was validated by checking if it was equal to the native loader or, if not, was loaded and validated by checking that it was executable and that the owner's owner == native loader.

## Alternatives Considered

* Transaction data size accounting is already enabled, so the null option is to
Expand Down
Loading