-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
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
Use an account for tracking the total circulation. #91
Merged
kantp
merged 6 commits into
main
from
66-eliminate-dos-vulnerability-in-the-reducer-calculating-the-circulating-supply
Jul 16, 2024
Merged
Use an account for tracking the total circulation. #91
kantp
merged 6 commits into
main
from
66-eliminate-dos-vulnerability-in-the-reducer-calculating-the-circulating-supply
Jul 16, 2024
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
Instead of using actions and reducers to update the current circulation in the contract state, we now use an account where the balance corresponds to the current circulation. - We use an account with the key of the token contract. - The account balance is updated at every call of `mint()` and `burn()`. - The `approveBase()` method checks that none of the involved `AccountUpdate`s does involve this - special account.
64df44b
to
4096eb0
Compare
mitschabaude
approved these changes
Jul 15, 2024
FungibleToken.ts
Outdated
return accountUpdate | ||
} | ||
|
||
@method.returns(AccountUpdate) | ||
async burn(from: PublicKey, amount: UInt64): Promise<AccountUpdate> { | ||
this.paused.getAndRequireEquals().assertFalse() | ||
const accountUpdate = this.internal.burn({ address: from, amount }) | ||
const circulationUpdate = AccountUpdate.create(this.address, this.deriveTokenId()) | ||
circulationUpdate.balanceChange = Int64.fromUnsigned(amount).mul(Int64.minusOne) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nit: Int64.fromUnsigned(amount).negV2()
should be more efficient (in terms of constraints) than using mul()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
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.
Instead of using actions and reducers to update the current circulation in the contract state, we now use an account where the balance corresponds to the current circulation.
mint()
andburn()
.approveBase()
method checks that none of the involvedAccountUpdate
s does involve this