fix: Correct column name in standalone transparent key query#395
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
I think at some point there was a column rename for
ext_zallet_keystore_standalone_transparent_keys(or a similar misunderstanding), which is causing an SQL error when running this SQL select statement.The bug is verified by reading the schema definition and seeing the column is
encrypted_transparent_privkey, while the SELECT query referencesencrypted_key_bytes. Note that other uses ofencrypted_key_bytes(like the INSERT statements in other locations in this same file) happens to work because they use positional binding, which is likely why the bug wasn't caught. The writes succeeded, but the reads failed.