Closed ctindogaru closed 2 years ago
@ctindogaru thanks for the update.
Currently however, the upgrade isn't possible with this method due to: https://github.com/near-daos/sputnik-dao-contract/blob/518ad1d97614fff4b945aba75b6c8bd2483187a2/sputnikdao-factory2/src/factory_manager.rs#L96 Which doesnt pay for storage, so essentially this method is broken. Once that line gets changed, it will then be a problem. Do you mind fixing the attached payment here as well?
I think that's a separate issue, and I would open a separate PR for it. Would you mind merging this one and open a new one for the deposit issue?
@ctindogaru thanks for the update.
Currently however, the upgrade isn't possible with this method due to:
Which doesnt pay for storage, so essentially this method is broken. Once that line gets changed, it will then be a problem. Do you mind fixing the attached payment here as well?
I m not sure why do you need deposit here?
I m not sure why do you need deposit here?
Without the deposit - the method fails, as it checks for payment to cover storage in "store_blob", look for ERR_NOT_ENOUGH_DEPOSIT
.
Did this as PR: https://github.com/near-daos/sputnik-dao-contract/pull/138 so i could merge while you sleep :)
I'm not seeing any difference between #138 which got merged and this PR?
I m not sure why do you need deposit here?
Without the deposit - the method fails, as it checks for payment to cover storage in "store_blob", look for
ERR_NOT_ENOUGH_DEPOSIT
.
store_blob
is not involved in any way in this flow.
This flow goes like this: factory::update -> dao::update -> dao::migrate
No deposit is needed in any of these methods, so nothing should fail.
Currently any DAO can update any DAO, which is a big security concern.
Limit the update process only to the owner of that DAO or the factory owner.