Near-Bugfix: Reestablish consensus check removed in 8d7849b
in 8d7849b6db
This can potentially prevent an overflow that could at least in theory
allow the creation of money.
This commit is contained in:
parent
3e8c91629e
commit
4e955c58e1
1 changed files with 4 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -1638,6 +1638,10 @@ static bool ConnectBlock(const CBlock& block, CValidationState& state, CBlockInd
|
||||||
return error("%s: Consensus::CheckTxInputs: %s, %s", __func__, tx.GetHash().ToString(), FormatStateMessage(state));
|
return error("%s: Consensus::CheckTxInputs: %s, %s", __func__, tx.GetHash().ToString(), FormatStateMessage(state));
|
||||||
}
|
}
|
||||||
nFees += txfee;
|
nFees += txfee;
|
||||||
|
if (!MoneyRange(nFees)) {
|
||||||
|
return state.DoS(100, error("%s: accumulated fee in the block out of range.", __func__),
|
||||||
|
REJECT_INVALID, "bad-txns-accumulated-fee-outofrange");
|
||||||
|
}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
// Check that transaction is BIP68 final
|
// Check that transaction is BIP68 final
|
||||||
// BIP68 lock checks (as opposed to nLockTime checks) must
|
// BIP68 lock checks (as opposed to nLockTime checks) must
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in a new issue