Add EIP: Circuit Breaker #7265
Add EIP: Circuit Breaker #7265
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
c-new
File
|
eth-bot
added
e-consensus
- Readme for testing instructions - Refactoring - including tests
|
The commit 19807d5 (as a parent of 8e1f744) contains errors. |
|
It's a great idea. I think Forta Network Devs @dylankilkenny and other security analysts should be included in the discussion. Contract protection is their specialty. |
|
it seems like Admin have way privileged roles here,they can execute functions like I think it might be a good idea to consider integrating with a timelock function into the major changes here. So that if the threshold is changed significantly and affect users getting their funds out, they can have a grace period to exist the system. |
|
Would there be some scope here to support more custom circuit breaking? Some protocols don't have inflow/outflows into their contract but they do facilitate exchange and volume. If the circuit breaker could be based on a number managed by the implementing contract, that could work. |
The proposed standard is agnostic to what the admin is; i.e., it could, for a given app, be decentralized / only operate on a timelock. So I don't think the standard itself needs to be opinionated on this. |
Co-authored-by: bobafetador <samglennss3@gmail.com>
syntax highlighting, thank you! Co-authored-by: Francisco <fg@frang.io>
| constructor( | ||
| address _admin, | ||
| uint256 _rateLimitCooldownPeriod, | ||
| uint256 _withdrawlPeriod, |
| totalChange += node.amount; | ||
| uint256 nextTimestamp = node.nextTimestamp; | ||
| // Clear data | ||
| limiter.listNodes[currentHead]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should be delete limiter.listNodes[currentHead]
| // If the list is empty, set the tail and head to current times | ||
| limiter.listHead = block.timestamp; | ||
| limiter.listTail = block.timestamp; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why block.timestamp is used here and not currentTickTimestamp? It would be cleaner that way.
| @@ -0,0 +1,16 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,53 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,362 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,198 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,151 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,17 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,50 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,385 @@ | |||
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Assuming you have the authority to change the license, we require a more permissive license like:
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: UNLICENSED | |
| // SPDX-License-Identifier: CC0-1.0 |
If you do not have authority to change the license, please remove this file.
| @@ -0,0 +1,372 @@ | |||
| --- | |||
| eip: 7265 | |||
| title: Circuit Breaker | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't think your title gives enough detail. Perhaps something like:
| title: Circuit Breaker | |
| title: Asset Outflow Circuit Breaker Protection |
|
|
||
| ## Motivation | ||
|
|
||
| Security breaches have become pervasive in DeFi. Over $6 Billion dollars worth of assets were stolen in exploits. When something goes wrong, protocols are rapidly drained of the majority of TVL often in a matter of seconds. Although many protocols have smart contracts which are fully upgradeable by governance, in practice there is usually no time to upgrade or patch vulnerabilities before large amounts of TVL are drained. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We generally prefer that the first use of an abbreviation is expanded:
| Security breaches have become pervasive in DeFi. Over $6 Billion dollars worth of assets were stolen in exploits. When something goes wrong, protocols are rapidly drained of the majority of TVL often in a matter of seconds. Although many protocols have smart contracts which are fully upgradeable by governance, in practice there is usually no time to upgrade or patch vulnerabilities before large amounts of TVL are drained. | |
| Security breaches have become pervasive in DeFi. Over $6 Billion dollars worth of assets were stolen in exploits. When something goes wrong, protocols are rapidly drained of the majority of their total value locked (TVL) often in a matter of seconds. Although many protocols have smart contracts which are fully upgradeable by governance, in practice there is usually no time to upgrade or patch vulnerabilities before large amounts of TVL are drained. |
|
I am closing this pull request because we are in the process of separating EIPs and ERCs into distinct repositories. Unfortunately, as far as we are aware, GitHub does not provide any tools to ease this migration, so every pull request will need to be re-opened manually. As this is a PR to create / modify an ERC, I will kindly ask you to redirect this to the new repository at ethereum/ERCs. We have prepared a guide to help with the process. If there is relevant history here, please link to this PR from the new pull request. On behalf of the EIP Editors, I apologize for this inconvenience. |
This standard outlines a smart contract interface for a Circuit Breaker that triggers a temporary halt on protocol-wide token outflows when a threshold is exceeded for a predefined metric. This circuit breaker does not assume the structure of the underlying protocol, and mainly serves as a pass-through vehicle for token outflows. In order to maintain correct internal accounting for integrated protocols, and to provide maximum flexibility for developers, developers can specify if the circuit breaker contract should delay settlement and temporarily custody outflows during the cooldown period, or revert on attempted outflows.