Explicitly require owner removal matches expected owner at index #42
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Co-authored-by: wilsoncusack <wilson.cusack@coinbase.com>
Co-authored-by: wilsoncusack <wilson.cusack@coinbase.com>
Co-authored-by: wilsoncusack <wilson.cusack@coinbase.com>
Natspec changes
wilsoncusack
approved these changes
Apr 2, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
An auditor from our Code4rena audit correctly identified that a call to
removeOwnerAtIndexcould be replayed on another chain but might remove a different owner if the owner indexes don't match cross-chain. Since this method is one of the one's that is allowed to be cross-chain repayable, this could lead to a malicious actor removing an owner that shouldn't be removed.This PR adds the owner bytes to the
removeOwnerAtIndexcall so that the removal explicitly targets an index and an owner.