Upgraded Q -> H from 41 [1655143123011]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 41 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: StakedCitadelVester.sol Not implemented IVesting interface. The function vest is named incorrectly . Should be setupVesting called from StakedCitadel.sol. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors wer...

IVesting(vesting).setupVesting is not implemented in StakedCitadelVester.sol.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When doing withdraw or withdrawAll in StakedCitadel.sol, it will call the internal function withdraw. The function then transfers tokens to the vesting contract, which should be StakedCitadelVester.sol. However, IVestingvesting.setupVesting is not...

DoS in StakedCitadel._withdraw() due to missing StakedCitadelVester.setupVesting() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Contract StakedCitadelVester inherits from interface IVesting in fact it does not as it is missing the necessary is IVesting statement, but it's assumed to inherit from IVesting but wrongly implements the interface. The contract is expected to implement the...

Incorrect interface for StakedCitadelVester causes withdrawals to revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details The IVesting interface contains a setupVesting function: IVesting4 interface IVesting function setupVesting address recipient, uint256 amount, uint256 unlockBegin external; This function is called to send withdrawals to the vesting contract in...