-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge branch 'main' into morpho-v1.1-vaults-base
- Loading branch information
Showing
9 changed files
with
576 additions
and
16 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,64 @@ | ||
| # ERC4626 Vault: `BeefyWrapper` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Details | ||
| - Reviewed by: @franzns | ||
| - Checked by: @danielmkm | ||
| - Deployed at: | ||
| - [sonic:0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x7870ddFd5ACA4E977B2287e9A212bcbe8FC4135a#code) | ||
| - Audits: | ||
| - [4626 wrapper audit](https://github.com/beefyfinance/beefy-audits/blob/master/2023-08-03-Beefy-Zellic-4626-Wrapper-Audit.pdf) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Context | ||
| A 4626 wrapper that can wrap the various Beefy vaults. Its created using their factory at [sonic:0x234f7f81434e340910a84f45f8e89d07fa86611a](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x234f7f81434e340910a84f45f8e89d07fa86611a). | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review Checklist: Bare Minimum Compatibility | ||
| Each of the items below represents an absolute requirement for the ERC4626. If any of these is unchecked, the the ERC4626 is unfit to use. | ||
|
|
||
| - [x] Tests based on the [balancer-v3-monorepo](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-monorepo/tree/main/pkg/vault/test/foundry/fork) pass for the given ERC4626 vaults, which can be found [here](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-erc4626-tests/blob/main/test/sonic/ERC4626BeefyUsdcSilo.sol). | ||
| - [x] The required Vault implements the required operational ERC4626 Interface | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review Checklist: Common Findings | ||
| Each of the items below represents a common red flag found in ERC4626 contracts. | ||
|
|
||
| If none of these is checked, then this might be a pretty great ERC4626! If any of these is checked, we must thoroughly elaborate on the conditions that lead to the potential issue. Decision points are not binary; a ERC4626 can be safe despite these boxes being checked. A check simply indicates that thorough vetting is required in a specific area, and this vetting should be used to inform a holistic analysis of the ERC4626. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Administrative Privileges | ||
| - [ ] The ERC4626 Vault is upgradeable. | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ### Common Manipulation Vectors | ||
| - [x] The ERC4626 Vault is susceptible to donation attacks. | ||
| - comment: The ERC4626 wrapper calls the vaults balance for totalAssets() which is part of the `totalAssets` used in the `converToAssets` calculation. | ||
|
|
||
| ```solidity | ||
| /** | ||
| * @notice Fetches the total assets held by the vault | ||
| * @dev Returns the total assets held by the vault, not only the wrapper | ||
| * @return totalAssets the total balance of assets held by the vault | ||
| */ | ||
| function totalAssets() public view virtual override returns (uint256) { | ||
| return IVault(vault).balance(); | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| The vault calculates it based on underlying balance inside the vault plus the balance inside the strategy. | ||
| ```solidity | ||
| /** | ||
| * @dev It calculates the total underlying value of {token} held by the system. | ||
| * It takes into account the vault contract balance, the strategy contract balance | ||
| * and the balance deployed in other contracts as part of the strategy. | ||
| */ | ||
| function balance() public view returns (uint) { | ||
| return want().balanceOf(address(this)) + IStrategyV7(strategy).balanceOf(); | ||
| } | ||
| ``` | ||
| The underlying balance can be inflated by donating underlying assets to the vault. | ||
| ## Additional Findings | ||
| To save time, we do not bother pointing out low-severity/informational issues or gas optimizations (unless the gas usage is particularly egregious). Instead, we focus only on high- and medium-severity findings which materially impact the contract's functionality and could harm users. | ||
| ## Conclusion | ||
| **Summary judgment: USABLE** | ||
| The outlined ERC4626 Vaults should work well with Balancer pools. |
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
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,38 @@ | ||
| # ERC4626 Vault: `Silo V2` | ||
|
|
||
| ## Details | ||
| - Reviewed by: @franzns | ||
| - Checked by: | ||
| - Deployed at: | ||
| - [sonic:0x52Fc9E0a68b6a4C9b57b9D1d99fB71449A99DCd8](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x52Fc9E0a68b6a4C9b57b9D1d99fB71449A99DCd8#code) | ||
| - [sonic:0x87178fe8698C7eDa8aA207083C3d66aEa569aB98](https://sonicscan.org/address/0x87178fe8698C7eDa8aA207083C3d66aEa569aB98#code) | ||
| - Audits: | ||
| - [Silo V2 audits](https://docs.silo.finance/audits-and-tests) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## Context | ||
| All Silo V2 markets are ERC4626 vaults be default. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review Checklist: Bare Minimum Compatibility | ||
| Each of the items below represents an absolute requirement for the ERC4626. If any of these is unchecked, the the ERC4626 is unfit to use. | ||
|
|
||
| - [x] Tests based on the [balancer-v3-monorepo](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-monorepo/tree/main/pkg/vault/test/foundry/fork) pass for the given ERC4626 vaults, which can be found [here](https://github.com/balancer/balancer-v3-erc4626-tests/blob/main/test/sonic/). | ||
| - [x] The required Vault implements the required operational ERC4626 Interface | ||
|
|
||
| ## Review Checklist: Common Findings | ||
| Each of the items below represents a common red flag found in ERC4626 contracts. | ||
|
|
||
| If none of these is checked, then this might be a pretty great ERC4626! If any of these is checked, we must thoroughly elaborate on the conditions that lead to the potential issue. Decision points are not binary; a ERC4626 can be safe despite these boxes being checked. A check simply indicates that thorough vetting is required in a specific area, and this vetting should be used to inform a holistic analysis of the ERC4626. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Administrative Privileges | ||
| - [ ] The ERC4626 Vault is upgradeable. | ||
|
|
||
| ### Common Manipulation Vectors | ||
| - [ ] The ERC4626 Vault is susceptible to donation attacks. | ||
|
|
||
| ## Additional Findings | ||
|
|
||
| ## Conclusion | ||
| **Summary judgment: USABLE** | ||
|
|
||
| The outlined ERC4626 Vaults should work well with Balancer pools. The underlying contracts have been audited. Computation of totalAssets do not rely on `balanceOf()` calls and also their audits do not indicate any risk of a donation attack vector. |
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
Oops, something went wrong.