-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
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
[Certora] Check underflow and overflows. #97
Comments
Related comments: |
As of today, proving properties w.r.t delegatee's voting power with Certora seem really difficult. Instead, in a61550f we assume them to be true and prove that there are no overflows under these hypothesis. Closing this issue as we see no way to prove the required properties. |
In #102 #104 we have managed to prove these invariants, they are now used in ERC20 and MintBurn specs instead of require-statements. I think this issue can be closed now, w.d.y.t. @QGarchery ? |
It would be best if we could only add "safe requires" and not change the spec of overflows because of the delegation feature. |
The ERC20 specification is patched to take support the possible (in practice impossible) overflows.
We should prove that these operations are safe.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: