search

EthTx / ethtx

Python package with core transaction decoding functions.
https://www.ethtx.info
Apache License 2.0
456 stars 75 forks source link

Bug in tx data decoding (token transfers & account balances sections) #163

Open shreyjain711 opened 2 years ago

shreyjain711 commented 2 years ago

Referring to this tx on etherscan, address 0x8c3FA50473065f1D90f186cA8ba1Aa76Aee409Bb is receiving 0.01 eth but as per the tx on ethtx.info the address is sending out the same amount.

The emitted events show it as a donation sent event which would indicate the aforementioned address should be the recipient of the amount rather than the one sending it, and hence, I'm inclined to believe that the decoding on etherscan is correct and ethtx's isn't.

I tried to make some more sense of the data and these points might help with debugging the issue: 0x8c3f.. is a gnosis safe multisig. Ethtx shows 0x8c3f.. is sending the eth to 0x34cf.., this recipient is actually the gnosis safe mastercopy contract. I think this is where the problem lies. this mastercopy be receiving the funds from the multisig doesn't seem right to me

CaledoniaProject commented 2 years ago

Same problem, please fix it ASAP.

111

rmaganza commented 1 year ago

Referring to this tx on etherscan, address 0x8c3FA50473065f1D90f186cA8ba1Aa76Aee409Bb is receiving 0.01 eth but as per the tx on ethtx.info the address is sending out the same amount.

The emitted events show it as a donation sent event which would indicate the aforementioned address should be the recipient of the amount rather than the one sending it, and hence, I'm inclined to believe that the decoding on etherscan is correct and ethtx's isn't.

I tried to make some more sense of the data and these points might help with debugging the issue: 0x8c3f.. is a gnosis safe multisig. Ethtx shows 0x8c3f.. is sending the eth to 0x34cf.., this recipient is actually the gnosis safe mastercopy contract. I think this is where the problem lies. this mastercopy be receiving the funds from the multisig doesn't seem right to me

Hello!

This issue should be fixed with the following PR to the backend (https://github.com/EthTx/ethtx/pull/162). You can already test locally by cloning ethtx repo. We will deploy it soon in the next release.

antazoey commented 6 months ago

The hash in the issue works now so this issue can probably be closed.