-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12.3k
Fix byte lookup when decoding length of RLP structure #6051
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
Conversation
🦋 Changeset detectedLatest commit: 3e96235 The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump. This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are. Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR |
WalkthroughThe changes modify RLP decoding logic in the RLP.sol utility contract. In the long-string validity check, the memory offset accessed for the zero-value guard is adjusted from position 0 to position 1. Similarly, in the long-list validity check, two separate validation conditions are consolidated into a single combined check that also reads from memory offset 1 instead of 0. The overall effect is a change in which memory offset is evaluated and a unification of boundary checks into a single require statement for both cases. Suggested labels
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches❌ Failed checks (1 inconclusive)
✅ Passed checks (1 passed)
✨ Finishing touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (9)
🔇 Additional comments (2)
Comment |
| 'openzeppelin-solidity': patch | ||
| --- | ||
|
|
||
| `RLP`: Fix RLP encoding validity check when decoding long lists or strings |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe include in a ### Bug fixes section of the changelog?
No description provided.