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

safeApprove deprecated #80

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Jan 10, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed

safeApprove deprecated #80

code423n4 opened this issue Jan 10, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
0 (Non-critical) Code style, clarity, syntax, versioning, off-chain monitoring (events etc), exclude gas optimisation bug Something isn't working disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

sirhashalot

Vulnerability details

Impact

The OpenZeppelin SafeERC20 safeApprove() function has been deprecated, as seen in the comments of the OpenZeppelin code. Using this deprecated function can lead to unintended reverts and potentially the locking of funds. A deeper discussion on the deprecation of this function is in OZ issue #2219.

Proof of Concept

The deprecated function is found in:

Tools Used

Manual analysis

Recommended Mitigation Steps

As suggested by the OpenZeppelin comment, replace safeApprove() with safeIncreaseAllowance().
@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 10, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 10, 2022
@code423n4
sirhashalot issue #80
f7ba71b
@r2moon r2moon added disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) duplicate This issue or pull request already exists labels Jan 11, 2022
@r2moon
Copy link
Collaborator

r2moon commented Jan 11, 2022

duplicated with #24

@dmvt dmvt 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 Jan 29, 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 disagree with severity Sponsor confirms validity, but disagrees with warden’s risk assessment (sponsor explain in comments) duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@dmvt @r2moon @code423n4 @CloudEllie