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

Informational - Undocumented assumption of private Gelato mempool #34

Open
kitty-the-kat opened this issue Jan 11, 2023 · 1 comment
Open

Comments

@kitty-the-kat
Copy link
Contributor

The design of the protocol assumes Gelato jobs execute transactions in a way that is MEV resistant. Gelato's public documentation does not clearly state this is guaranteed. If this assumption is broken, the protocol could lose value.

Technical Details

MEV protection mitigates the risk of a frontrun, backrun, or sandwich that can extract value from a transaction. This most often happens during swap operations. The design of Gro Protocol assumes that when a Gelato keeper executes a transaction, there will be MEV protection. The Gelato documentation does not clarify that this is a guarantee that keepers offer and whether there is still risk of an uncle bandit attack. The MEV mitigation is expected to exist based on discussions with the Gro devs, but the lack of official documentation around the mempool guarantees provided by Gelato jobs, the possibility of changes over time, and the risk of a rogue Gelato keeper are all possible concerns with this approach.

Impact

Informational.

Recommendation

Gelato should clarify their approach to MEV protection for Gelato jobs. Before Gelato update their documentation, Gro should monitor the keeper-controlled actions in Gro for any potential foul play.

@kitty-the-kat
Copy link
Contributor Author

Acknowledged: will inform Gelato :D
We'll make a note in our docs that the jobs are set up to guarantee running through MEV

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant