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.

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

safeApprove of openZeppelin is deprecated #20

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Jan 27, 2022 · 2 comments
Open

safeApprove of openZeppelin is deprecated #20

code423n4 opened this issue Jan 27, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

robee

Vulnerability details

You use safeApprove of openZeppelin although it's deprecated.
(see https://github.com/OpenZeppelin/openzeppelin-contracts/blob/566a774222707e424896c0c390a84dc3c13bdcb2/contracts/token/ERC20/utils/SafeERC20.sol#L38)
You should change it to increase/decrease Allowance as OpenZeppilin says.
This appears in the following locations in the code base:

    Deprecated safeApprove in TreasuryManager.sol line 78: IERC20(token).approve(ASSET_PROXY, amount); 
@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 Jan 27, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 27, 2022
@jeffywu jeffywu added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Feb 6, 2022
@jeffywu
Copy link
Collaborator

jeffywu commented Feb 6, 2022

Duplicate #153

@pauliax
Copy link
Collaborator

pauliax commented Feb 12, 2022

It is not a duplicate, #153 suggests resetting the approval before setting a new one, and this issue suggests replacing safeApprove with safeIncreaseAllowance/safeDecreaseAllowance.

However, the automated tool that the warden uses marked a wrong code place where this should be applied. Based on my understanding, it should be applied where safeApprove is used:
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-01-notional/blob/d171cad9e86e0d02e0909eb66d4c24ab6ea6b982/contracts/sNOTE.sol#L82-L83

I am leaving this as a non-critical recommendation.

@pauliax pauliax reopened this Feb 12, 2022
@pauliax pauliax 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 Feb 12, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants