If requestMint() is called before mintFee is initially set via setMintFee(), the return of _getMintFees(collateralAmountIn) can be "underflow" , which results in the loss for the protocol and the unexpected-benefit for certain users

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This vulnerability lead to the loss for this protocol and the unexpected-benefit for certain users like this: The protocol cannot earn the fee in collateral feesInCollateral that is supposed to be earned unless the MANAGERADMIN set the certain amount of...

mintFee can be set to 100%

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The mintFee can be set to 100%. An amount of centralization over the usual is to be expected in a protocol that deals with RWAs and requires KYC but being able to set the fee to 100% is unnecessary, dangerous, and could harm Ondo's reputation. Proof of...

Upgraded Q -> H from 63 [1655008454311]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 63 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: Function CoreCollection:initialize can be executed by owner after initialisation and state variables like mintFee, maxSupply can be changed to increase/decrease fee and supply, isForSale can be set to false to stop...