Post-Judging QA

[liveactionllama]

1. Please post feedback about specific findings on the relevant issue in this repo.
2. Post a comment in this discussion linking to all findings you've commented on, along with any general feedback for the judge.

The judge for this contest is @alex-ppg.

Both the Validation repo and the Findings repo will be open to wardens with the SR role, for the purposes of post-judging QA.

• All post-judging QA requests must be posted in this Github Discussion in the findings repo.
• QA and Gas reports closed by Validators (i.e. not added to the findings repo) are NOT eligible.

Reminders

• Please keep your comments as fact-based as possible.
• C4 judges have final authority in determining validity and severity.
• Please link to specific issues and don't try to start discussions here.
• Please familiarize yourselves with our Good Citizen Policy.

Thank you!

[adeolu98]

hi @alex-ppg, thanks for judging. i left a comment on #146, please check.

[rodiontr]

Hi @alex-ppg ! Thanks for your quick judging! I left many comments on many issues so sorry for that but would really appreciate if you take a look:

From the validation repo:
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#140
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#166
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#204
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#160

code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#169
(the following issues are associated with this finding but are different as one issue does not fix the other one:
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#179
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#171)

From the findings repo:

#108
#54
#117
#116
#120
#130

[alex-ppg]

Hey @rodiontr, you have raised concerns for 13 separate exhibits. I have evaluated each one, and have concluded that all have no merit given that they rely on misconceptions, are invalid, outline documentation mismatches of little importance, and so on.

I would strongly advise you to specify at most 3 exhibits you have an issue with to receive a detailed response during the PJQA process.

[rodiontr]

Hey @rodiontr, you have raised concerns for 13 separate exhibits. I have evaluated each one, and have concluded that all have no merit given that they rely on misconceptions, are invalid, outline documentation mismatches of little importance, and so on.

I would strongly advise you to specify at most 3 exhibits you have an issue with to receive a detailed response during the PJQA process.

got it, thanks for the feedback anyway

[Slavchew]

Hey @alex-ppg, left a comment on #68

[Slavchew]

Hey @alex-ppg I provided the real-world example proving that this issue is valid.

[Slavchew]

@alex-ppg can you please check #68 again. Why is the issue closed?

[blckhv]

Hey @alex-ppg,

I left some comments on the following issues from the validation repo:

• Position is not updated when fees are collected 2024-08-superposition-validation#254
• token code length is not checked in wasm_erc20 2024-08-superposition-validation#239
• Deadline is missing in update_position 2024-08-superposition-validation#250
• Incorrect Slippage Check in swapInPermit2CEAAB576 Function Allows Excessive Slippage, Risking User Funds 2024-08-superposition-validation#216

Thanks!

[blckhv]

Answered to code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#250 (comment)

Thanks!

[cryptostaker2]

Hi @alex-ppg , thanks for judging!

Left a comment in validation 108.

Thanks!

[bronzepickaxe]

Hi @alex-ppg,

Left a comment over at code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#24

Please let us know if you need any additional input.

Thanks!

[devival]

Hello @alex-ppg,
Left a comment for

• Sender with both emergency_council and authorised_enablers roles cannot disable the pool 2024-08-superposition-validation#217

Thank you!

[0xSilvermist]

Hi @alex-ppg,
I left a comment on #62.

[0xTester]

Hi @alex-ppg, I left a comment on #53
Thank you!

[ZanyBonzy]

Hi @alex-ppg , thanks for the work. Left comments on #138 and here. Would love to hear your thoughts.

[Ys-Prakash]

Hi @alex-ppg

I have left comments on #77, #48, #167

Thank you

[Ys-Prakash]

Hi @alex-ppg

I replied to #77

Thank you

[Ys-Prakash]

Hi @alex-ppg

I replied to #167

Thank you

[DadeKuma]

Hello @alex-ppg,

Here are my comments:

Findings:
#61
#48

Validation:
code-423n4/2024-08-superposition-validation#51

I think most downgraded QA were miscategorized as grade-c unsatisfactory for Wardens with at least a grade-b QA report.

For example, my QA report has a grade-A, but this downgraded issue: #139 has grade-C, and thus it's unsatisfactory.

This will unfairly reduce the accuracy score, so it would be better to fix these labels as they should have the same grade as the original QA report (not only mine, but every downgraded HM for other Wardens).

[thebrittfactor]

Please note: PJ QA has now closed. No additional comments should be added unless requested by the judge.