fix: [CL-008] remove duplicate wrapping #281
Open
+10
−5
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Summary by OctaneNew ContractsNo new contracts were added in this PR. Updated Contracts
🔗 Commit Hash: 3ec2481 |
|
Contract sizes: | Contract | Runtime Size (B) | Initcode Size (B) | Runtime Margin (B) | Initcode Margin (B) |
|-------------------------------|------------------|-------------------|--------------------|---------------------|
| AccountFactory | 4,814 | 5,239 | 19,762 | 43,913 |
| AllowlistModule | 9,903 | 9,930 | 14,673 | 39,222 |
| ExecutionInstallDelegate | 5,694 | 5,740 | 18,882 | 43,412 |
| ModularAccount | 21,971 | 28,654 | 2,605 | 20,498 |
| NativeFunctionDelegate | 434 | 461 | 24,142 | 48,691 |
| NativeTokenLimitModule | 4,258 | 4,285 | 20,318 | 44,867 |
| PaymasterGuardModule | 1,797 | 1,824 | 22,779 | 47,328 |
-| SemiModularAccountBytecode | 23,273 | 29,956 | 1,303 | 19,196 |
-| SemiModularAccountStorageOnly | 23,767 | 30,450 | 809 | 18,702 |
+| SemiModularAccountBytecode | 23,354 | 30,037 | 1,222 | 19,115 |
+| SemiModularAccountStorageOnly | 23,848 | 30,531 | 728 | 18,621 |
| SingleSignerValidationModule | 3,646 | 3,673 | 20,930 | 45,479 |
| TimeRangeModule | 2,000 | 2,027 | 22,576 | 47,125 |
| WebAuthnValidationModule | 7,854 | 7,881 | 16,722 | 41,271 |Code coverage:
|
OverviewOctane AI analysis has finished. No vulnerabilities were found. Cheers! 🎉🎉🎉 🔗 Commit Hash: 3ec2481 |
adamegyed
reviewed
Nov 11, 2024
| if (_checkSignature(fallbackSigner, _replaySafeHash(hash), signature)) { | ||
| // If called during validateUserOp, this implies that we're doing a deferred validation installation. | ||
| // In this case, as the hash is already replay-safe, we don't need to wrap it. | ||
| if (msg.sig != this.validateUserOp.selector) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure this is the right way to do this switching logic, it seems ok on first glance but feels a bit fragile. Could we make the caller of _exec1271Validation perform the wrapping in the cases where it is needed, and skip it in the deferred action case?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you elaborate on this point?
Would you instead not wrap it in validateUserOp()'s deferred validation section, but wrap in isValidSignature()?
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
to reviewers: best to review other deferred action changes first since that can impact this