contracts icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
contracts copied to clipboard
verified publisher icon lifinance

Deprecate unused interfaces [CalldataVerificationFacet v1.3.0]

Open 0xDEnYO opened this issue 10 months ago • 2 comments

Which Jira task belongs to this PR?

Why did I implement it this way?

Checklist before requesting a review

  • [ ] I have performed a self-review of my code
  • [ ] This pull request is as small as possible and only tackles one problem
  • [ ] I have added tests that cover the functionality / test the bug
  • [ ] For new facets: I have checked all points from this list: https://www.notion.so/lifi/New-Facet-Contract-Checklist-157f0ff14ac78095a2b8f999d655622e
  • [ ] I have updated any required documentation

Checklist for reviewer (DO NOT DEPLOY and contracts BEFORE CHECKING THIS!!!)

  • [ ] I have checked that any arbitrary calls to external contracts are validated and or restricted
  • [ ] I have checked that any privileged calls (i.e. storage modifications) are validated and or restricted
  • [ ] I have ensured that any new contracts have had AT A MINIMUM 1 preliminary audit conducted on by <company/auditor>

0xDEnYO avatar Feb 24 '25 04:02 0xDEnYO

[!WARNING]

Rate limit exceeded

@mirooon has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 1 minutes and 50 seconds before requesting another review.

⌛ How to resolve this issue?

After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the @coderabbitai review command as a PR comment. Alternatively, push new commits to this PR.

We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit.

🚦 How do rate limits work?

CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization.

Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout.

Please see our FAQ for further information.

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between d22e13f53bf2b7268b26b2751c914c27b550c075 and 71ab866fb72960b632d5b97dd392196e4ae72ac7.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • .github/workflows/securityAlertsReview.yml (1 hunks)

Walkthrough

This update revises several configuration and deployment scripts to transition from the older Stargate configuration files to a new v2 format. In stargateV1.json, a new chain entry has been added, while in stargateV2.json, a previously defined endpoint mapping array has been removed. Multiple scripts have been updated to reference the new stargateV2.json configuration file, and deployment resource definitions have been adjusted by removing outdated blocks and updating file references accordingly.

Changes

File(s) Summary
archive/config/stargateV1.json Added a new chain entry { "chainId": 5000, "lzChainId": 181 } and resolved merge conflict markers in formatting.
config/stargateV2.json Removed the endpointIds array, leaving only the "zksync" entry marked as "---comingSoon---".
script/demoScripts/demoStargateV2Tx.ts Updated import statement from ../../config/stargate.json to ../../config/stargateV2.json.
script/deploy/facets/DeployReceiverStargateV2.s.sol
script/deploy/facets/DeployStargateFacetV2.s.sol
script/deploy/zksync/DeployReceiverStargateV2.s.sol
script/deploy/zksync/DeployStargateFacetV2.s.sol		 Updated file path references in functions (e.g., getConstructorArgs) from "/config/stargate.json" to "/config/stargateV2.json".
script/deploy/resources/deployRequirements.json Removed the "StargateFacet" and "Receiver" blocks, and updated "StargateFacetV2" and "ReceiverStargateV2" blocks to use stargateV2.json for configuration.

Possibly related PRs

  • lifinance/contracts#1002: Involved similar modifications to the chains array in stargateV1.json, indicating a direct code-level connection with the new chain entry addition.

Suggested labels

AuditRequired

Suggested Reviewers

  • ezynda3

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

coderabbitai[bot] avatar Feb 24 '25 04:02 coderabbitai[bot]

Test Coverage Report

Line Coverage: 78.75% (2079 / 2640 lines) Function Coverage: 83.68% ( 359 / 429 functions) Branch Coverage: 45.24% ( 233 / 515 branches) Test coverage (78.75%) is above min threshold (76%). Check passed.

lifi-action-bot avatar Feb 24 '25 04:02 lifi-action-bot

🤖 GitHub Action: Security Alerts Review 🔍

🟢 Dismissed Security Alerts with Comments The following alerts were dismissed with proper comments:

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 Performing a narrowing downcast may result in silent overflow due to bit truncation. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/unsafe-downcast 🔹 Dismiss Reason: Won't fix 🔹 Dismiss Comment: We are aware of this and the facet is specifically designed to deal with deterministically constructed calldata that meets these requirements and does not lead to truncation of important information

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 Test functions fail to verify specific revert reasons, potentially missing important contract behavior validation. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/missing-revert-reason-tests 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: This alert was fixed in another, separate PR: https://github.com/lifinance/contracts/pull/1037 However, since that fixing PR did not touch the CalldataVerificationFacet (only the related test file), the fix was not detected as such and this error was not resolved.

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 The contract is vulnerable to signature replay attacks, potentially allowing malicious actors to reuse valid signatures. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/signature-replay-attacks 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: There is no signature being used in this function at all

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 External calls to functions with dynamic return types may possibly run out of gas if calling a malicious function. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/external-call-potential-out-of-gas 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: The call is an internal call, not an external one, therefore false positive as it cannot be malicious

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 External calls to functions with dynamic return types may possibly run out of gas if calling a malicious function. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/external-call-potential-out-of-gas 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: The call is an internal call, not an external one, therefore false positive as it cannot be malicious

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 External calls to functions with dynamic return types may possibly run out of gas if calling a malicious function. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/external-call-potential-out-of-gas 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: The call is an internal call, not an external one, therefore false positive as it cannot be malicious

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 Performing a narrowing downcast may result in silent overflow due to bit truncation. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/unsafe-downcast 🔹 Dismiss Reason: Won't fix 🔹 Dismiss Comment: We are aware of this and the facet is specifically designed to deal with deterministically constructed calldata that meets these requirements and does not lead to truncation of important information

🟢 View Alert - File: src/Facets/CalldataVerificationFacet.sol 🔹 Calling a function without checking the return value may lead to silent failures. For more information, visit: http://detectors.olympixdevsectools.com/article/web3-vulnerability/unused-return-function-call 🔹 Dismiss Reason: False positive 🔹 Dismiss Comment: We are using the return value of the function as if condition

✅ No unresolved security alerts! 🎉

lifi-action-bot avatar Feb 26 '25 02:02 lifi-action-bot