QA Report

[code423n4]

See the markdown file with the details of this report here.

[JustDravee]

• 1: L
• 2: Dup https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-03-polynomial-findings/issues/91
• 3: Will communicate to sponsor
• 4: L (would've been R without the detailed explanation and comparison)
• 5: OOS
• 6: NC
• 7: OOS
• 8: Valid R and interesting one at that (good signal)
• 9: R
• 10: R
• 11: R/Gas (good one)
• 12: Would've said OOS but additional details make this relevant. R
• 13: R, good one. Rest is generic R

Good report with a good signal

[c4-judge]

JustDravee marked the issue as grade-a

[rbserver]

Hi @JustDravee,

I noticed your note about communicating with the sponsor regarding [03] ALLOWING ShortCollateral.refresh FUNCTION TO BE CALLABLE BY ANYONE CAN BE DANGEROUS. I wonder if this has been communicated and which risk level this issue is associated with. Should this issue be considered as a low risk or a medium risk?

Thanks again for your time and work!

[JustDravee]

Medium severity for [03] seems fair. To quote the sponsor:

We only meant refresh to be called once to propagate the addresses, but this could be dangerous in a situation where the warden explained. It is unlikely that any of these addresses change as all Synthetix contracts under proxies 103 & 105 are DoS attacks though. Even though you can request the services of withdraw, it'll never get executed after the attack.

[JustDravee]

Adding https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-03-polynomial-findings/issues/228 as Low

[c4-judge]

JustDravee marked the issue as selected for report