Open code423n4 opened 2 years ago
Would rephrase to lack of CEI pattern, as no reEntrancy was demonstrated
Informational
Valid
Technically valid but safeApprove is being used correctly throughout the codebase
In lack of alternative, the one line comment is not useful
In lack of a suggested refactoring, the one line comment is not useful
Agree that this needs to be changed, and believe Low Severity to be appropriate because this is happening in a constructor
*Occurrences in: https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/AmmGauge.sol#L130-L134 *https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/AmmGauge.sol#L108-L111
*Occurrences in: https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/VestedEscrow.sol#L68 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/VestedEscrow.sol#L74 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/Minter.sol#L99
3.. Missing zero address check The following are missing checks for existence of zero address which may lead to transfers to zero address or causing some functions to no longer be accessible.
*Occurrences in: https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/AmmGauge.sol#L124 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/AmmGauge.sol#L56 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/AmmGauge.sol#L103 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/BkdLocker.sol#L70 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/FeeBurner.sol#L31 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/FeeBurner.sol#L31 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/StakerVault.sol#L111 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/StakerVault.sol#L139 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/StakerVault.sol#L359 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/Minter.sol#L126 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/Minter.sol#L144 *https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/VestedEscrow.sol#L65
*Occurrences in: https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/RewardHandler.sol#L52 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/RewardHandler.sol#L64 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/FeeBurner.sol#L118 *https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/zaps/PoolMigrationZap.sol#L27
*Occurrences in: https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/RewardHandler.sol#L64 *https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/FeeBurner.sol#L118
6.. Costly external calls in a loop https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/Controller.sol#L127 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/RewardHandler.sol#L44 *https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/RewardHandler.sol#L44 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/FeeBurner.sol#L70 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/VestedEscrow.sol#L99 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-backd/blob/main/protocol/contracts/tokenomics/VestedEscrow.sol#L102