Aragon Protocol contest - imare's results

The most user-friendly tech stack to launch your DAO.

General Information

Platform: Code4rena

Start Date: 03/03/2023

Pot Size: $90,500 USDC

Total HM: 4

Participants: 42

Period: 7 days

Judge: 0xean

Total Solo HM: 2

Id: 219

League: ETH

Aragon Protocol

Findings Distribution

Researcher Performance

Rank: 32/42

Findings: 1

Award: $72.43

QA:
grade-b

🌟 Selected for report: 0

🚀 Solo Findings: 0

Awards

72.4344 USDC - $72.43

Labels

bug
grade-b
QA (Quality Assurance)
sponsor disputed
Q-10

External Links

QA-01: No min interval between start and end proposal date when proposal is created

Inside Multisig#createPoposal there is no verification that user will have enough time to for approving this proposal. A check for minimal interval between start and end date is missing.

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-03-aragon/blob/4db573870aa4e1f40a3381cdd4ec006222e471fe/packages/contracts/src/plugins/governance/multisig/Multisig.sol#L205-L262

QA-02: There should be a method for PluginSetupProcessor to verify if uninstalling a plugin version will work in the future

Manually checking that the prepared data for uninstall after installing a plugin can be a tedious maybe also unnecessary work.

The PluginSetupProcessor should have a method that:

  1. calls for the preparation of install data for a version of a plugin then
  2. for the same plugin version calls for preparation of uninstall data with the same input as in the install data preparation call
  3. and finally checks that all given permission that are imposed by the install data are revoked by the uninstall data.

By having this method as a view returning bool on successfully rollback of permissions the DAO has assurance that uninstallation of a plugin will work.

#0 - c4-judge

2023-03-12T16:07:23Z

0xean marked the issue as grade-c

#1 - 0xean

2023-03-18T23:08:52Z

warden also has issues #134 and #135 included as part of their QA, and as such, will upgrade to grade B

#2 - c4-judge

2023-03-18T23:08:56Z

0xean marked the issue as grade-b

#3 - novaknole20

2023-03-22T13:08:02Z

QA-1 Yep but that is fine for a Multsig. We used the safe as a reference and they don't have it either.

QA-2 I don't believe that this should belong into the contract. If such a verification is necessary one can use a TX simulator like tenderly.

#4 - c4-sponsor

2023-03-22T13:08:06Z

novaknole20 marked the issue as sponsor disputed

AuditHub

A portfolio for auditors, a security profile for protocols, a hub for web3 security.

Built bymalatrax © 2024

Auditors

Browse

Contests

Browse

Get in touch

ContactTwitter