The closeBidOffer function is intended to close a bid offer, but it's checking if the offer status is "Virgin" (presumably meaning untouched or new). This doesn't align with the function's purpose or the comment above the function.
The comment states:
However, the code is checking for the opposite condition:
This means the function will revert for any offer that isn't in the Virgin status, which contradicts the intended behavior described in the comment.
Funds could potentially be locked in the contract. If bid offers can't be closed properly, the deposited funds for these offers might become inaccessible. This could lead to a loss of funds for users who can't retrieve their unused bid amounts.
The condition should be changed to check for the Settling status instead.
And the correct comment should be:
Add this function for testing purposes
Based on the current Tadle market system, the `Settling` status is never used (along with `Ongoing` and `Filled`), which is supposed to represent the state before settlement by original maker. While sementically, the `Virgin` status does not represent the correct phase to allow early closures before settlement, this issue does not have any current impact given technically the early closure of bid offers is still allowed. However, if we are basing it off of the correct status implementation (i.e. `Settling` phase appropriately updated when takers create offers), then the DoS will occur, essentially blocking any early closure of bids by subsequent makers, forcing them to follow through to final settlement. Unfortunately, none of these issues identify the correct pre-context mentioned above, but I believe medium severity is appropriate. Note for downgrade to low severity: Agree with above appeals and low severity, this is more of a status accounting error and does not have any impact, given the function of `closeBidOffer` is to withdraw the unused portion of sales proceeds. It can be executed as long as the TGE time has been reached, and it restricts the offer to be in a Virgin state. Since the statuses consistently do not utilize a switch from Vigin to Ongoing/Filled and the protocol can function appropriately even without the use of such statuses (presuming other bugs are fixed), the DoS impact will not occur.
Based on the current Tadle market system, the `Settling` status is never used (along with `Ongoing` and `Filled`), which is supposed to represent the state before settlement by original maker. While sementically, the `Virgin` status does not represent the correct phase to allow early closures before settlement, this issue does not have any current impact given technically the early closure of bid offers is still allowed. However, if we are basing it off of the correct status implementation (i.e. `Settling` phase appropriately updated when takers create offers), then the DoS will occur, essentially blocking any early closure of bids by subsequent makers, forcing them to follow through to final settlement. Unfortunately, none of these issues identify the correct pre-context mentioned above, but I believe medium severity is appropriate. Note for downgrade to low severity: Agree with above appeals and low severity, this is more of a status accounting error and does not have any impact, given the function of `closeBidOffer` is to withdraw the unused portion of sales proceeds. It can be executed as long as the TGE time has been reached, and it restricts the offer to be in a Virgin state. Since the statuses consistently do not utilize a switch from Vigin to Ongoing/Filled and the protocol can function appropriately even without the use of such statuses (presuming other bugs are fixed), the DoS impact will not occur.
The contest is live. Earn rewards by submitting a finding.
This is your time to appeal against judgements on your submissions.
Appeals are being carefully reviewed by our judges.