Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

QA Report #330

Open
c4-bot-4 opened this issue Jan 18, 2024 · 8 comments
Open

QA Report #330

c4-bot-4 opened this issue Jan 18, 2024 · 8 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working grade-a high quality report This report is of especially high quality Q-13 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax selected for report This submission will be included/highlighted in the audit report sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")

Comments

@c4-bot-4
Copy link
Contributor

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

@c4-bot-4 c4-bot-4 added bug Something isn't working QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax labels Jan 18, 2024
c4-bot-10 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 18, 2024
c4-bot-6 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 18, 2024
@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added the high quality report This report is of especially high quality label Jan 21, 2024
@141345
Copy link

141345 commented Jan 22, 2024

330 0xA5DF
l r nc
4 2 0

L 1 d dup of #443
L 2 l
L 3 d dup of #111
L 4 d dup of #396
L 5 d dup of #238
L 6 d dup of #409
L 7 l
L 8 l
L 9 l
L 10 r
L 11 r

@c4-sponsor
Copy link

Alec1017 (sponsor) confirmed

@c4-sponsor c4-sponsor added the sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity") label Jan 24, 2024
@Alec1017
Copy link

L1- Acknowledged
L2- Acknowledged
L3- Disputed, considered out of scope because it doesnt adhere to standard ERC721 spec
L4- Disputed, this is expected behavior
L5- Confirmed
L6- Confirmed
L7- Disputed, stop module will not be whitelisted
L8- Acknowledged, hook implementations considered out of scope
L9- Disputed, policies can only be enabled or disabled. in this instance, a second stop policy would be created for users to opt-in to

R1- Acknowleged
R2- Disputed, this is intended behavior. To disable the hook, updateHookStatus would be used here instead. the bitmap would be set to 0. It does not matter what the path is set to if the status is 0

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

0xean marked the issue as grade-a

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

0xean marked the issue as selected for report

@c4-judge c4-judge added the selected for report This submission will be included/highlighted in the audit report label Jan 27, 2024
@0xean
Copy link

0xean commented Jan 29, 2024

L3- OOS
L7 - invalid
R2 - invalid

others lgtm.

@0xA5DF
Copy link

0xA5DF commented Jan 30, 2024

L1 is dupe of #443
L5 is dupe of #43

@0xean
Copy link

0xean commented Feb 1, 2024

#443 is QA, upgraded L5 / #43

@C4-Staff C4-Staff added the Q-13 label Feb 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working grade-a high quality report This report is of especially high quality Q-13 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax selected for report This submission will be included/highlighted in the audit report sponsor confirmed Sponsor agrees this is a problem and intends to fix it (OK to use w/ "disagree with severity")
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants