Delegated accounts custom errors #832
Open
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
![github-advanced-security[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/57789?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
Comment on lines
+29
to
+32
| modifier onlyAccountAdmin(address account) { | ||
| require(accounts[account].admins.contains(msg.sender), CallerNotAdmin()); | ||
| _; | ||
| } |
Check notice
Code scanning / Slither
Incorrect modifier
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // The mapping of account address to all of the delegated account info for it. | ||
| mapping(address => DelegatedAccountInfo) internal accounts; |
Check failure
Code scanning / Slither
Uninitialized state variables
ypatil12
force-pushed
the
custom-errors
branch
2 times, most recently
from
db2ccda
to
153d625
Compare
1) Interface for composable permission controller. 2) Storage layout for permission controller. 3) Initial implementation for controller. I also added a library for a bytes4 enumerable set, since OZ didn't have one. We do this so people can easily inspect which permissions on which contracts people have. We could also add an index for which contracts have permissions, but I figured that getting the list of important addresses (core contracts + AVS contracts) would be far more legibile off-chain. We could maintain it on chain and provide that list of contracts, and quite frankly it would be great because then you could determine ALL permissions that a user had simply with view functions. I might add this incrementally if we can align on the basics here.
ypatil12
force-pushed
the
delegated-accounts-custom-errors
branch
from
1c323e2
to
6d96106
Compare
0xrajath
reviewed
Oct 17, 2024
Comment on lines
+91
to
+93
| ////////////////////////////////////////////////// | ||
| // Public Introspection Interface | ||
| ////////////////////////////////////////////////// |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is the idea that the core protocol functions would check one of these view functions to see if it's an admin or if it's a delegate and has the right permissions?
0xrajath
reviewed
Oct 17, 2024
| emit AccountDelegateStateChange(account, msg.sender, target, selector, delegate, hasPermission); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| ////////////////////////////////////////////////// |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This would need a hasPermission view function too.
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.
No description provided.