merchant

commit ce5fe921a270c0b53f2b69881c3d13469da65daf
parent ee77fb016ef9e2657cebc52ab7e8bdd412dac734
Author: Christian Grothoff <christian@grothoff.org>
Date:   Fri, 11 Apr 2025 21:14:48 +0200

increase kyc-check frequency to 6h if we are zero-limited on ops we care about (see #9719)

Diffstat:
M
src/backend/taler-merchant-kyccheck.c
 | 
18
+++++++++++++++++-

1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/src/backend/taler-merchant-kyccheck.c b/src/backend/taler-merchant-kyccheck.c
@@ -229,6 +229,13 @@ struct Inquiry
   bool not_first_time;
 
   /**
+   * Do soft limits on transactions apply to this merchant for operations
+   * merchants care about? If so, we should increase our request frequency
+   * and ask more often to see if they were lifted.
+   */
+  bool zero_limited;
+
+  /**
    * Did we not run this inquiry due to limits?
    */
   bool limited;
@@ -447,6 +454,7 @@ store_kyc_status (
   json_decref (i->jlimits);
   jlimits = json_array ();
   GNUNET_assert (NULL != jlimits);
+  i->zero_limited = false;
   for (unsigned int j = 0; j<account_kyc_status->limits_length; j++)
   {
     const struct TALER_EXCHANGE_AccountLimit *limit
@@ -454,6 +462,14 @@ store_kyc_status (
 
     pack_limit (limit,
                 jlimits);
+    if (TALER_amount_is_zero (&limit->threshold) &&
+        limit->soft_limit &&
+        ( (TALER_KYCLOGIC_KYC_TRIGGER_DEPOSIT == limit->operation_type) ||
+          (TALER_KYCLOGIC_KYC_TRIGGER_AGGREGATE == limit->operation_type) ||
+          (TALER_KYCLOGIC_KYC_TRIGGER_TRANSACTION == limit->operation_type) ) )
+    {
+      i->zero_limited = true;
+    }
   }
   i->jlimits = jlimits;
   GNUNET_break (! GNUNET_is_zero (&account_kyc_status->access_token));
@@ -498,7 +514,7 @@ exchange_check_cb (
     store_kyc_status (i,
                       &ks->details.ok);
     i->backoff = GNUNET_TIME_UNIT_ZERO;
-    if (i->aml_review)
+    if (i->aml_review || i->zero_limited)
     {
       if (! progress)
         i->due = GNUNET_TIME_relative_to_absolute (AML_FREQ);