Fix: Add missing return path in validateMPTProof #30
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
- Add revert statement after for loop to handle incomplete traversal edge case - Prevents undefined behavior when proof validation completes without explicit return The function now explicitly reverts with a clear error message if proof traversal is incomplete.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
This PR fixes a security vulnerability in the
validateMPTProoffunction where the for loop could complete without hitting any return statement, causing undefined behavior or potential DoS attacks.Changes:
revert()statement after the for loop invalidateMPTProoffunctionFunction now explicitly reverts with clear error message if proof traversal is incomplete, ensuring predictable behavior and preventing potential DoS