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

Don't try bonding zero liquidity in RewardReinvestor #101

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Nov 29, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

Don't try bonding zero liquidity in RewardReinvestor #101

code423n4 opened this issue Nov 29, 2021 · 1 comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

pmerkleplant

Vulnerability details

Impact

Function RewardReinvestor::_bondAccount tries to bond liquidity to an account,
even though it is known whether the liquidity is zero.

Proof of Concept

The return value liquidityCreated in line 105 can be zero.
The following function call, bondToAccount(), then reverts with "Cannot bond 0".

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Gas could be saved if the function would revert earlier, i.e. in line 106,
if the liquidityCreated is zero.

@code423n4 code423n4 added bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) labels Nov 29, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 29, 2021
@0xScotch 0xScotch added the sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity") label Dec 10, 2021
@GalloDaSballo
Copy link
Collaborator

In principle I agree with the finding, failing early would save the cost of the approve and the CALL
In practice the refactoring may be more complex than necessary, so up to the sponsor to actually implement the improvement

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working G (Gas Optimization) sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants