Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

USE OF DEPRECATED _SETUPROLE FUNCTION #14

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Nov 20, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

USE OF DEPRECATED _SETUPROLE FUNCTION #14

code423n4 opened this issue Nov 20, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

Reigada

Vulnerability details

Impact

The contract MixinRoles.sol make use of the deprecated function _setupRole from the AccessControl contract. As per the AccessControl.sol contract documentation, this function is deprecated:
https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/master/contracts/access/AccessControl.sol#L183

Using deprecated functions may eventually produce an unwanted behaviour, for example, if OpenZeppelin decides to remove or update the function.

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-11-unlock/blob/main/smart-contracts/contracts/mixins/MixinRoles.sol#L31
https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-11-unlock/blob/main/smart-contracts/contracts/mixins/MixinRoles.sol#L34

Tools Used

Manual testing

Recommended Mitigation Steps

It is recommended to use the _grantRole function instead.
@code423n4 code423n4 added 1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Something isn't working labels Nov 20, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 20, 2021
@code423n4
Reigada issue #14
e129138
@julien51 julien51 added disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons labels Jan 3, 2022
@0xleastwood
Copy link
Collaborator

This does not pose a direct security risk. Hence, marking as non-critical.

@0xleastwood 0xleastwood added 0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation and removed 1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments labels Jan 16, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@julien51 @0xleastwood @code423n4