-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
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.
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
The Contract Should Approve(0) first #153
Labels
bug
Something isn't working
invalid
This doesn't seem right
sponsor acknowledged
Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
Comments
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
Feb 2, 2022
jeffywu
added
sponsor acknowledged
Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
duplicate
This issue or pull request already exists
and removed
sponsor acknowledged
Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
labels
Feb 6, 2022
This was referenced Feb 6, 2022
Closed
Closed
jeffywu
added
the
sponsor disputed
Sponsor cannot duplicate the issue, or otherwise disagrees this is an issue
label
Feb 6, 2022
We do not support USDT so we are not affected by this issue. |
jeffywu
added
sponsor acknowledged
Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
and removed
sponsor disputed
Sponsor cannot duplicate the issue, or otherwise disagrees this is an issue
labels
Feb 8, 2022
Even if such tokens were supported, I do not think this is an issue, because the approve function is external and callable by the owner, so an owner can explicitly make 2 calls if necessary specifying a 0 amount in the first one. function approveToken(address token, uint256 amount) external onlyOwner {
IERC20(token).approve(ASSET_PROXY, amount);
} |
pauliax
added
invalid
This doesn't seem right
and removed
1 (Low Risk)
Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments
labels
Feb 12, 2022
weitianjie2000
added a commit
to notional-finance/staked-note
that referenced
this issue
Feb 15, 2022
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
bug
Something isn't working
invalid
This doesn't seem right
sponsor acknowledged
Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
Handle
defsec
Vulnerability details
Impact
Some tokens (like USDT L199) do not work when changing the allowance from an existing non-zero allowance value.
They must first be approved by zero and then the actual allowance must be approved.
Proof of Concept
Tools Used
None
Recommended Mitigation Steps
Approve with a zero amount first before setting the actual amount.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: