hyperledger/fabric · error

chaincode deployment spec cannot be nil in a package

Error message

chaincode deployment spec cannot be nil in a package

What it means

ValidateCC rejects a signed chaincode package whose ChaincodeDeploymentSpec inside the SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec is nil. The library cannot validate or instantiate a package without the underlying deployment spec, so it fails early. This is a structural integrity check on the deserialized package.

Source

Thrown at core/common/ccprovider/sigcdspackage.go:192

	id := hash.Sum(nil)

	return b, id, scdsdata, nil
}

// ValidateCC returns error if the chaincode is not found or if its not a
// ChaincodeDeploymentSpec
func (ccpack *SignedCDSPackage) ValidateCC(ccdata *ChaincodeData) error {
	if ccpack.sDepSpec == nil {
		return errors.New("uninitialized package")
	}

	if ccpack.sDepSpec.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec == nil {
		return errors.New("signed chaincode deployment spec cannot be nil in a package")
	}

	if ccpack.depSpec == nil {
		return errors.New("chaincode deployment spec cannot be nil in a package")
	}

	// This is a hack. LSCC expects a specific LSCC error when names are invalid so it
	// has its own validation code. We can't use that error because of import cycles.
	// Unfortunately, we also need to check if what have makes some sort of sense as
	// protobuf will gladly deserialize garbage and there are paths where we assume that
	// a successful unmarshal means everything works but, if it fails, we try to unmarshal
	// into something different.
	if !isPrintable(ccdata.Name) {
		return fmt.Errorf("invalid chaincode name: %q", ccdata.Name)
	}

	if ccdata.Name != ccpack.depSpec.ChaincodeSpec.ChaincodeId.Name || ccdata.Version != ccpack.depSpec.ChaincodeSpec.ChaincodeId.Version {
		return fmt.Errorf("invalid chaincode data %v (%v)", ccdata, ccpack.depSpec.ChaincodeSpec.ChaincodeId)
	}

	otherdata := &SignedCDSData{}
	err := proto.Unmarshal(ccdata.Data, otherdata)

View on GitHub (pinned to 2736b63f8f)

Solutions

1. Rebuild the chaincode package with `peer chaincode package` so the signed deployment spec is fully populated
2. Verify the SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec bytes are non-empty before packaging
3. Regenerate the package from the original ChaincodeDeploymentSpec rather than patching existing bytes

Example fix

// before (manual struct, missing spec)
sDepSpec := &pb.SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec{}
// after
sDepSpec := &pb.SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec{
    ChaincodeDeploymentSpec: depSpecBytes, // proto.Marshal of a populated ChaincodeDeploymentSpec
    OwnerEndorsements: endorsements,
}

func validateSignedCDS(s *pb.SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec) error {
    if s == nil || len(s.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec) == 0 {
        return errors.New("signed CDS missing inner deployment spec")
    }
    cds := &pb.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec{}
    return proto.Unmarshal(s.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec, cds)
}

func hasDepSpec(s *pb.SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec) bool {
    return s != nil && s.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec != nil && len(s.ChaincodeDeploymentSpec) > 0
}

if _, err := ccpack.InitFromBuffer(buf); err != nil {
    if strings.Contains(err.Error(), "deployment spec cannot be nil") {
        // regenerate the package
    }
    return err
}

When it happens

Trigger: Calling GetCCPackage on a signed CDS package whose SignedChaincodeDeploymentSpec.chaincode_deployment_spec field was never populated, or whose bytes were built manually with an empty inner spec.

Common situations: Hand-crafted or corrupted chaincode package files; tooling that serialized only the signature envelope but omitted the inner deployment spec; truncated/corrupted tar packages transferred between environments.

Related errors

• only applicable for private data
• did not find a code package inside the package
• illegal file detected in payload: "%s"
• illegal file detected in payload: "%s"
• illegal file mode detected for file %s: %o

AI-assisted analysis of hyperledger/fabric@2736b63f8f (2026-09-04). Data as JSON: /api/errors/a985dc654e926d74. Report an issue: GitHub.