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

[VEN-2770] Revoke Guardian Permissions #363

Closed
wants to merge 7 commits into from
Closed

Conversation

web3rover
Copy link
Contributor

Description

Resolves VEN

@web3rover web3rover changed the title [VEN-2770] Revoke Guardian Permissions for Oracles, XVS Vault, XVS Store, Comptrollers, VTokens and Pool Registry [VEN-2770] Revoke Guardian Permissions Aug 23, 2024
@web3rover web3rover marked this pull request as draft August 23, 2024 12:35
@web3rover web3rover marked this pull request as ready for review August 27, 2024 07:27
Comment on lines 42 to 53
{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [arbitrumone.REDSTONE_ORACLE, "setTokenConfig(TokenConfig)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
dstChainId: LzChainId.arbitrumone,
},
{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [arbitrumone.REDSTONE_ORACLE, "setDirectPrice(address,uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
dstChainId: LzChainId.arbitrumone,
},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wouldn't revoke these permissions. They are granted in the ChainlinkOracle, that is similar to this oracle

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed

Comment on lines +175 to +186
{
target: ETHEREUM_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ethereum.REDSTONE_ORACLE, "setTokenConfig(TokenConfig)", ethereum.GUARDIAN],
dstChainId: LzChainId.ethereum,
},
{
target: ETHEREUM_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ethereum.REDSTONE_ORACLE, "setDirectPrice(address,uint256)", ethereum.GUARDIAN],
dstChainId: LzChainId.ethereum,
},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I wouldn't revoke these permissions

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed

};
return makeProposal(
[
// Revoke Permissions
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Permissions on RewardDistributor contracts were set using the wildcard 0x0 (see it here, for Arbitrum and Ethereum). So, I suppose we should revoke the permission on the 0x0 address, not on specific addresses

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed

};
return makeProposal(
[
// Revoke Permissions
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The zero address was used to grant permissions on the IR models. So, I suppose we shouldn't use specific addresses to revoke these permissions, but the zero address

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Fixed

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "setTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setMaxTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setMaxTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "setMaxTokensDistributionSpeed(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setMaxLoopsLimit(uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setMaxLoopsLimit(uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "setMaxLoopsLimit(uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "updateAlpha(uint128,uint128)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "updateAlpha(uint128,uint128)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "updateAlpha(uint128,uint128)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "updateMultipliers(address,uint256,uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "updateMultipliers(address,uint256,uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "updateMultipliers(address,uint256,uint256)", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

{
target: ARBITRUM_ONE_ACM,
signature: "revokeCallPermission(address,string,address)",
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "setStakedAt(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Suggested change
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PLP, "setStakedAt(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],
params: [ARBITRUM_ONE_PRIME, "setStakedAt(address[],uint256[])", arbitrumone.GUARDIAN],

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

PLP should be replaced by prime and vice versa on many places

@web3rover
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this PR and will open new PR utilising ACMCommandsAggregator for revoking permissions

@web3rover web3rover closed this Sep 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants