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

Cant remove the first operator #200

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Nov 17, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Cant remove the first operator #200

code423n4 opened this issue Nov 17, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

pauliax

Vulnerability details

Impact

function removeOperator has this check:

  (i > 0, "NestedFactory::removeOperator: Cant remove non-existent operator");

However, 0 is actually a valid index of the array. It represents the first operator.

Recommended Mitigation Steps

A potential solution is to use the EnumerableSet to manage the operators: https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/master/contracts/utils/structs/EnumerableSet.sol
@code423n4 code423n4 added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working labels Nov 17, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 17, 2021
@code423n4
pauliax issue #200
fbeb271
@maximebrugel maximebrugel added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Nov 18, 2021
@maximebrugel
Copy link
Collaborator

Duplicated : #58

@alcueca
Copy link
Collaborator

alcueca commented Dec 3, 2021

Duplicate of #220

@alcueca alcueca marked this as a duplicate of #220 Dec 3, 2021
@CloudEllie CloudEllie added 1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments and removed 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value labels Dec 3, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@maximebrugel @alcueca @code423n4 @CloudEllie