Closed c4-submissions closed 11 months ago
2007 0xepley
l r nc
2 0 3
L 1 l
L 2 i
L 3 n
L 4 n
L 5 l
L 6 n
L 7 d dup of https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-10-nextgen-findings/issues/508
L 8 d dup of https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-10-nextgen-findings/issues/179
141345 marked the issue as sufficient quality report
The Warden's QA report has been graded C based on a score of 13 combined with a manual review per the relevant QA guideline document located here.
The Warden's submission's score was assessed based on the following findings:
However, upon manual re-evaluation, the Warden does not advise that the check should be non-inclusive / inclusive and simply advises a re-evaluation which would not highlight or fix the problem. As such, the final score of the submission is 3
.
alex-ppg marked the issue as grade-c
can you pls have another look at the above QA report as i'm not sure if your comments on this report are 100% correct
the QA report doesn't specify #1275 issue but have completely different issues
Hey @Nabeel-javaid, thanks for requesting a follow-up review of this. Your number 6
submission was credited with a Low-Risk on an initial pass and upon manual review this score was removed which aligns with what you specified as you do not mention #1275, your recommendation is merely related to it.
All other QA submissions have been nullified per the relevant document referenced above. In detail:
1
score to the overall report.uint256
is ill-advised as it leads to gas increases.0
matches the 1st element and an index of 99
matches the 100th element string
arguments in case their payloads are too large
See the markdown file with the details of this report here.