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

BasketLicenseProposed better emit proposal id #134

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Dec 10, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

BasketLicenseProposed better emit proposal id #134

code423n4 opened this issue Dec 10, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

gzeon

Vulnerability details

Impact

Since tokenName is user supplied and can be duplicated, it is better to emit proposal id instead.

https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-12-defiprotocol/blob/205d3766044171e325df6a8bf2e79b37856eece1/contracts/contracts/Factory.sol#L91

        emit BasketLicenseProposed(msg.sender, tokenName);
@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 Dec 10, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 10, 2021
@code423n4
gzeon issue #134
77bd41a
@frank-beard frank-beard added disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity") labels Feb 23, 2022
@frank-beard
Copy link
Collaborator

not really an issue but good feedback

@0xleastwood
Copy link
Collaborator

I think this is better as a non-critical issue.

@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 disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) labels Mar 26, 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 sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@0xleastwood @code423n4 @frank-beard