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

Upgraded Q -> M from 417 [1657853103938] #442

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Jul 15, 2022 · 2 comments
Closed

Upgraded Q -> M from 417 [1657853103938] #442

code423n4 opened this issue Jul 15, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Judge has assessed an item in Issue #417 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows:

@code423n4 code423n4 added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge labels Jul 15, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 15, 2022
@HickupHH3
Copy link
Collaborator

(L1) fee can change for ongoing orders
The owner can call setFee(uint256 _fee) and change the fee amount. This changes the fee taken for all orders already filled/exercised.

In some situations, an user may not have filled an order if they knew the fee would end up higher. This situation is alleviated by the fact that the fee is capped at 3%.

Recommendations
The fee can be written in the Order struct and checked that it matches the current correct value during fillOrder. This way when exercising/withdrawing we can use the "order.fee" irrespective to the current global variable.

@HickupHH3
Copy link
Collaborator

dup of #422

@HickupHH3 HickupHH3 added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Jul 15, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants