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

QA Report #65

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Dec 22, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

QA Report #65

code423n4 opened this issue Dec 22, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working edited-by-warden grade-a Q-09 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

See the markdown file with the details of this report here.

@code423n4 code423n4 added bug Something isn't working QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax labels Dec 22, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 22, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 22, 2022
C4-Staff added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2023
@GalloDaSballo
Copy link

GalloDaSballo commented Jan 24, 2023

Open TODOs

NC

Modularity on import usages

NC

Inadequate NatSpec

NC

Typo mistakes

NC

5% annual calculated on a daily interval not fully precised

L

Hard coded initialization

Disputing as those are settings that can be set by the deployer and others can chose to use or not

Inexpedient ternary logic

NC

Custom contract pauser and resumer

L

Unusual multisig logic

TODO Dup 50%

Comments and codes mismatch

L

GGP token exchange

Disputing as the DAO will figure it out in a separate contract, for example Balancer BPT

GGP tokens circulated distributions

L

Missing use for delegationFee

R

No storage gap for upgradeable contracts

Disputing as it's the child contract

Variable assignment in conditional checks

R

Zero value check on `withdrawAVAX() in TokenggAVAX.sol

R

Parameterized custom errors

R

bytes32 over bytes

I don't think this is valid, the key is a word the result may be bigger

Empty blocks

Disagree

@GalloDaSballo
Copy link

3L from dups

4L 4R 5NC

@GalloDaSballo
Copy link

7L 4R 5NC

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

c4-judge commented Feb 3, 2023

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as grade-a

@C4-Staff C4-Staff added the Q-09 label Feb 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working edited-by-warden grade-a Q-09 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants