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

Add zero address check for sender #1008

Closed
smol-ninja opened this issue Aug 1, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Add zero address check for sender #1008

smol-ninja opened this issue Aug 1, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
effort: medium Default level of effort. priority: 1 This is important. It should be dealt with shortly. type: refactor Change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature. work: clear Sense-categorize-respond. The relationship between cause and effect is clear.

Comments

@smol-ninja
Copy link
Member

smol-ninja commented Aug 1, 2024

There is no check if the sender is a zero address.

Anybody can accidentally set sender as zero address when creating the streams. Now because other functions such as cancel, renounce etc. are sender only, the stream creator would not be able to use them.

Thus, the task is to add zero address check for sender.

References

@smol-ninja smol-ninja added type: refactor Change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature. priority: 1 This is important. It should be dealt with shortly. work: clear Sense-categorize-respond. The relationship between cause and effect is clear. effort: medium Default level of effort. labels Aug 1, 2024
@PaulRBerg
Copy link
Member

PaulRBerg commented Aug 1, 2024

Agree with the general point, however:

it can lead to denial-of-service with those functionalities

That doesn't sound correct. Why would it be DoS?

@smol-ninja
Copy link
Member Author

smol-ninja commented Aug 1, 2024

Yeah you're right. I was talking in the context of genuine creator who accidentally used zero address for sender. And this would lead him to not be able to use services (cancel, renounce etc). But I think I misused "denial-of-service" in the description (edited now).

@PaulRBerg
Copy link
Member

Got it, thanks for explaining.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
effort: medium Default level of effort. priority: 1 This is important. It should be dealt with shortly. type: refactor Change that neither fixes a bug nor adds a feature. work: clear Sense-categorize-respond. The relationship between cause and effect is clear.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants