Skip to content

Conversation

@CDSecurity
Copy link

Added 7 security considerations related to Chainlink Oracle as well as a link to the article which explains these problems more in depth.

Added 7 security considerations related to Chainlink Oracle as well as a link to the article which explains these problems more in depth.
damianrusinek added a commit to damianrusinek/SCSVS that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2023
Co-authored-by: Damian Rusinek <damian.rusinek@gmail.com>
| **I3.9** | Verify that NOT the same heartbeat is used for multiple price feeds when using Chainlink Oracle |
| **I3.10** | Verify that the code deals with different price feeds having different decimal precision when using Chainlink Oracle |
| **I3.11** | Verify that the price feed address wherever it is located(hardcoded, deployment script) is pointing to the correct oracle price feed |
| **I3.12** | Verify that the code handles calls to the oracle if they potentially revert when using Chainlink Oracle |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you mean a situation when call to price feed reverts? If so, what is the risk? The whole tx would revert right?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey @CDSecurity, just a quick reminder. Can you elaborate on that?

@damianrusinek
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @CDSecurity for update. I have addressed your comments.

We are also thinking about how to present the checks for specific protocols (like Chainlink). One option is to separate them as I proposed here: https://github.com/ComposableSecurity/SCSVS/pull/12/files, but that is not yet decided.

I am mentioning that because if we decide to separate them, these check will also have to be re-organized.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants