QA Report

[code423n4]

[L-01] ABSENCE OF ZERO ADDRESS CHECK FOR ADDRESSES IN CONSTRUCTOR

There are 2 instances of this issue:

File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L137-L140 File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L

Recommended Mitigation

There should be require() that validate a perticular address is zero address or not

[L-02] ABSENCE OF CHECK FOR minTargetVotes IN CONSTRUCTOR

There are 1 instances of this issue:

File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L142

Recommended Mitigation

There should be upperbound or lowerbound check for minTargetVotes inside constructor

[L-03] DIVIDE BEFORE MULTIPLICATION CAUSE PRECISION LOSS

There are 1 instances of this issue:

File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L182

Recommended Mitigation

Multiple should occur before Divide like, (timestamp / WEEK) WEEK; To (timestamp WEEK) / WEEK;

[N-01] REPEATED CODE NOTICED IN SOME FUNCTIONS

This following code repeatedly used in multiple functions like in extendPledge(), increasePledgeRewardPerVote(), retrievePledgeRewards(), closePledge()

if(pledgeId >= pledgesIndex()) revert Errors.InvalidPledgeID(); address creator = pledgeOwner[pledgeId]; if(msg.sender != creator) revert Errors.NotPledgeCreator(); if(receiver == address(0)) revert Errors.ZeroAddress();

File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L374-L378 File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L420-L424 File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L456-L462 File : => https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-10-paladin/blob/main/contracts/WardenPledge.sol#L488-L493

So i recommend there should be a private fuction that handle this verification of pledge part and return "Pledge storage pledgeParams" on success, and that private function call inside other external functions.

[kirk-baird]

L-03: is invalid as it's a deliberate rounding technique. Remaining issues are valid but I consider them grade-b.

[c4-judge]

kirk-baird marked the issue as grade-b