You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This is not a huge problem, as the expiration can be updated to a future block height or timestamp, or removed entirely. Should we add validation that the block height or timestamp is in the future when creating a new allowance? Happy to make a PR for this if there is interest.
NB this was found in an audit of Mars protocol in a contract that was forked from the cw-plus cw20-base contract.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Expirations are not validated when allowances are created,
cw-plus/contracts/cw20-base/src/allowances.rs
Line 28 in fa0c5ac
only when they are used
cw-plus/contracts/cw20-base/src/allowances.rs
Line 95 in fa0c5ac
This is not a huge problem, as the expiration can be updated to a future block height or timestamp, or removed entirely. Should we add validation that the block height or timestamp is in the future when creating a new allowance? Happy to make a PR for this if there is interest.
NB this was found in an audit of Mars protocol in a contract that was forked from the cw-plus cw20-base contract.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: