Skip to content

Fix/validate hotkey existence in stake move#940

Closed
boskodev790 wants to merge 93 commits intolatent-to:mainfrom
boskodev790:fix/validate-hotkey-existence-in-stake-move
Closed

Fix/validate hotkey existence in stake move#940
boskodev790 wants to merge 93 commits intolatent-to:mainfrom
boskodev790:fix/validate-hotkey-existence-in-stake-move

Conversation

@boskodev790
Copy link
Copy Markdown

No description provided.

thewhaleking and others added 30 commits April 2, 2026 20:24
…ock-owner-alpha

Fix/e2e tests for stake locked as owner alpha feat
…urn-settings

fix: update max_burn to owner/sudo settable and align no-prompt routing
…eration-mapping

fix: `stake add` operation mapping for multi-hotkey and multi-netuid
Update: Log SHA & other info during release
…y-creator-checks

fix(crowdloan): normalize creator checks for proxy actors
thewhaleking and others added 27 commits April 23, 2026 21:03
…ot-unstake-nonexistent-hks

Do not unstake from hotkeys that do not exist on chain
…ey-id-decode

Decode hotkey ss58 if bytes
…re-limit-price-is-rao

Ensure the call params are not Balance objects
…p-asi-cyscale

Resolves the issue with the disk cache
Closes latent-to#925.

`stake move` and `stake transfer` previously composed and submitted the
extrinsic without verifying that the supplied hotkey SS58 was registered
on chain. When a user passed an unregistered key, the failure surfaced
as a generic chain-side error after the transaction was already on the
network.

`stake/add.py` and `stake/remove.py` already perform this pre-flight
validation via `subtensor.do_hotkeys_exist`. Mirror that pattern in
`move_stake` (checks both origin and destination hotkeys) and
`transfer_stake` (checks origin hotkey).

`swap_stake` is unaffected since it derives the hotkey from the local
wallet rather than user input.
@boskodev790 boskodev790 force-pushed the fix/validate-hotkey-existence-in-stake-move branch from 63b989c to 099fef9 Compare April 24, 2026 23:16
@thewhaleking
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I think this is a duplicate of #939

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants