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 -> 2 from #1011 [1716984547522] #1321

Closed
c4-judge opened this issue May 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Closed

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #1011 [1716984547522] #1321

c4-judge opened this issue May 29, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value duplicate-829 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards

Comments

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

Judge has assessed an item in Issue #1011 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows:

[L-06] Deployment script deploys bounded kerosine without calling setUnboundedKerosineVault
Issue Description:

Deployment of the BoundedKerosineVault happens without calling setUnboundedKerosineVault, that will eventually make the price of the asset 0, when admin license it and users begin to use it. The consequences will be that it won’t support depositor’s collateral rate and will limit their minting capabilities.

DeployV2.sol#L78-L82

BoundedKerosineVault boundedKerosineVault = new BoundedKerosineVault(
vaultManager,
Kerosine(MAINNET_KEROSENE),
kerosineManager
);
Recommendation:

Despite that it is not going to be used for now, call the setUnboundedKerosineVault in the script as well.

@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 May 29, 2024
c4-judge added a commit that referenced this issue May 29, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor Author

koolexcrypto marked the issue as satisfactory

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label May 29, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor Author

koolexcrypto marked the issue as duplicate of #829

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 duplicate-829 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant