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

QA Report #7

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Mar 20, 2022 · 3 comments
Open

QA Report #7

code423n4 opened this issue Mar 20, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax 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

Unresolved TODOs

./revenue-distribution-token/contracts/RevenueDistributionToken.sol:78:    // TODO: Revisit returns
./revenue-distribution-token/contracts/RevenueDistributionToken.sol:276:        // TODO: investigate whether leave this `require()` in for clarity from error message, or let the safe math check in `callerAllowance - shares_` handle the underflow.

Lack max fee in _setEstablishmentFees

Recommend to hardcode some reasonable max fee to protect user
https://github.com/maple-labs/loan/blob/4c6fe2cd91d6d16b8434c426fe7eb6d2bc77bc30/contracts/MapleLoanInternals.sol#L347

Wrong comment re:issuanceRate

It is the asset/second rate scaled by precision, i.e. already increased precision
https://github.com/maple-labs/revenue-distribution-token/blob/41a3e40bf8c109ff19b38b80fde300c44fd42a3d/contracts/RevenueDistributionToken.sol#L28
@code423n4 code423n4 added QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax bug Something isn't working labels Mar 20, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 20, 2022
@code423n4
gzeon issue #7
1b9e99d
@lucas-manuel
Copy link
Collaborator

Will update issuanceRate comment, this is informational

@lucas-manuel lucas-manuel 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 Mar 21, 2022
@lucas-manuel
Copy link
Collaborator

TODOs are duplicated

@lucas-manuel
Copy link
Collaborator

We won't add sanity checks to _setEstablishmentFees

@JGcarv JGcarv mentioned this issue Mar 23, 2022
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug Something isn't working disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax 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
2 participants
@lucas-manuel @code423n4