Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 15, 2023. It is now read-only.

Should a NonTransfer proxy be able to set_accept_ownership of an asset? #1206

Open
gilescope opened this issue Apr 22, 2022 · 2 comments
Open
Labels
T7-system_parachains This PR/Issue is related to System Parachains.

Comments

@gilescope
Copy link
Contributor

On statemint, should a ProxyType::NonTransfer be able to set_accept_ownership? This would allow a non-transfer proxy (a proxy that could not send assets to other accounts) to opt into receiving certain assets within that account. (The set_accept_ownership is there in general to prevent people drive by inserting things into your account without your permission)

This is currently barred, but I think this should probably be allowed.

@gilescope gilescope added the T7-system_parachains This PR/Issue is related to System Parachains. label Apr 22, 2022
@gilescope
Copy link
Contributor Author

@NachoPal pointed out that there's a fair few methods that are currently not proxied: #1189 (comment)

So maybe we should also consider making some of those methods available to proxies also.

@xlc
Copy link
Contributor

xlc commented Apr 22, 2022

We should really be doing opt-in instead of opt-out.
A missed opt-in means people won’t be able to something they should be able to do but a missed opt-out means people can do something they shouldn’t be able to do, which is just another level of issue.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
T7-system_parachains This PR/Issue is related to System Parachains.
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants