L-1 Initializing deposit cap

[0xdcota]

[L-1] Initializing the deposit cap to type(uint128).max with the option of changing it later through timelock defies its purpose.

Description

The deposit cap is intended to cap the exposure initially. However, Fuji vaults define the deposit cap as type(uint128).max during construction with the option of reducing it through the timelock.

BaseVault.sol

constructor(
    address asset_,
    address chief_,
    string memory name_,
    string memory symbol_
  )
    ERC20(name_, symbol_)
    SystemAccessControl(chief_)
    VaultPermissions(name_)
  {
         -----
    depositCap = type(uint128).max; 
    ----
  }

This defeats the purpose of the deposit cap, since it allows exceeding the planned deposit cap before the timelock takes effect. Therefore, we classify this issue as medium severity.

Remediation to consider

Consider making a deposit cap a user input during construction.

[0xdcota]

This low impact issue should be linked to #450 .

[pedrovalido]

start the PR from #487 branch. Deposit cap is going to be removed. Address this issue taking this into account

[pedrovalido]

@DaigaroCota Deposit cap will be removed so this issue should be closed.

[0xdcota]

Refer to rationale for decision to close this issue in #528.