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

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #748 [1675439377792] #887

Closed
c4-judge opened this issue Feb 3, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #748 [1675439377792] #887

c4-judge opened this issue Feb 3, 2023 · 2 comments
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value duplicate-521 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards

Comments

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

c4-judge commented Feb 3, 2023

Judge has assessed an item in Issue #748 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows:

[L] MultisigManager doesn't have unregister function
MultisigManager.sol contains a hard limit of MULTISIG_LIMIT to 10. Meanwhile in the contract, there are functions like registerMultisig, enableMultisig, and disableMultisig. So, logically, there should be a unregister or remove for the multisig.

If the limit is reached and some address was disabled or maybe compromised, it will locked the protocol from registering new multisig.

If multisig is secure enough so that it wont get compromised, then the hard limit of it seems unnecessary.
@c4-judge c4-judge added the 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value label Feb 3, 2023
c4-judge added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 3, 2023
@c4-judge
cryptonue issue #887 (File generated from upgraded finding by judge G…
a0e1ae0 
…alloDaSballo)
@c4-judge c4-judge closed this as completed Feb 3, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor Author

c4-judge commented Feb 3, 2023

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as duplicate of #521

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Feb 8, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor Author

c4-judge commented Feb 8, 2023

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as satisfactory

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value duplicate-521 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@c4-judge