Skip to content

Conversation

@ungaro
Copy link
Member

@ungaro ungaro commented Oct 22, 2025

What's new in this PR?

In bullet point format, please describe what's new in this PR.

Why?

What problem does this solve?
Why is this important?
What's the context?

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 22, 2025 14:17
@octane-security-app
Copy link

octane-security-app bot commented Oct 22, 2025

Summary by Octane

New Contracts

No new contracts were added in this PR.

Updated Contracts

  • Raffle.sol: The smart contract adds winner invalidation, valid winner counting, and includes new error checks to enhance prize management and integrity.

🔗 Commit Hash: 0775919

Copy link

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

This PR adds functionality to invalidate raffle winners, allowing administrators to mark specific winners as invalid and enabling the prize to be redrawn. The implementation includes new error types, events, helper functions for managing winner validity, and a migration utility to backfill validity flags for existing winners.

Key changes:

  • Added invalidateWinner function for admins to invalidate specific winners
  • Introduced valid flag tracking in the Winner struct with helper functions
  • Added migration utility backfillValidFlags to update existing winner records

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 21 comments.

File Description
plume/src/spin/Raffle.sol Implements winner invalidation logic, validity tracking, and migration utilities
plume/test/Raffle.t.sol Updates all test cases to include the new formId parameter in function calls

Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.

revert NotAWinner();
}

if (!individualWin.claimed) {
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The condition is inverted - it should check if (!individualWin.valid) instead of if (!individualWin.claimed). Currently, this reverts when a winner hasn't claimed their prize yet, which is the opposite of the intended behavior. The check should verify that the winner is valid before allowing them to claim.

Suggested change
if (!individualWin.claimed) {
if (!individualWin.valid) {

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
function testSpendRaffleInsufficient() public {
vm.prank(ADMIN);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1,"0");
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nitpick] Missing space after comma before "0". For consistency with other calls in the file (e.g., line 47, 69), add a space between the comma and the string argument.

Suggested change
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1,"0");
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1, "0");

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
function testRequestWinnerEmitsEvents() public {
vm.prank(ADMIN);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1,"0");
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nitpick] Missing space after comma before "0". For consistency with other calls in the file (e.g., line 47), add a space between the comma and the string argument.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
function testClaimPrizeSuccess() public {
vm.prank(ADMIN);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1);
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1,"0");
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nitpick] Missing space after comma before "0". For consistency with other calls in the file (e.g., line 47), add a space between the comma and the string argument.

Suggested change
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1,"0");
raffle.addPrize("A", "A", 0, 1, "0");

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
@octane-security-app
Copy link

octane-security-app bot commented Oct 22, 2025

Overview

Vulnerabilities found: 4                                                                                
Severity breakdown: 1 High, 1 Medium, 2 Low
Warnings found: 5                                                                                

Detailed findings

plume/src/spin/Raffle.sol

  • Redundant O(n) scans in Raffle winner selection flow cause DoS of drawing winners. See more
  • Unbounded iteration in Raffle.getValidWinnersCount used in state-changing flows causes per-prize winner selection DoS. See more
  • Missing entry freeze during VRF pending state in Raffle causes late-entry dilution and compromised fairness. See more
  • Missing stale request invalidation in Raffle cancelWinnerRequest allows canceled VRF draw to execute. See more

Warnings

plume/src/spin/Raffle.sol

  • O(n) linear removal and unprunable completed prizes in Raffle causes self-DoS of removePrize. See more
  • Inconsistent validation allowing zero quantity in Raffle.editPrize causes prize-level DoS and stranded entries. See more
  • Unnecessarily payable receive() with no withdrawal in Raffle implementation causes ETH to be permanently locked. See more
  • Missing initialization address validation in Raffle.initialize causes denial of raffle functionality. See more
  • Unprotected initializer in Raffle implementation causes attacker-controlled raffle under admin misconfiguration, enabling unfair deduction of user raffle tickets. See more

🔗 Commit Hash: 0775919
🛡️ Octane Dashboard: All vulnerabilities

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 23, 2025 15:55
Copy link

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.


Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings October 24, 2025 14:43
Copy link

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.


Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.

Comment on lines +296 to +302
if (winnersDrawn[prizeId] > 0) {
winnersDrawn[prizeId] -= 1;
}
uint256 c = userWinCount[prizeId][w.winnerAddress];
if (c > 0) {
userWinCount[prizeId][w.winnerAddress] = c - 1;
}
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nitpick] The manual synchronization of winnersDrawn and userWinCount creates potential for inconsistency. Since getValidWinnersCount() now computes the actual count by iterating invalidWinners, consider whether winnersDrawn still serves a purpose or if it should be deprecated to reduce redundancy and maintenance burden.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
Comment on lines +377 to +381
for (uint256 i = 0; i < arr.length; i++) {
if (!invalidWinners[prizeId][i]) {
count++;
}
}
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

getValidWinnersCount() iterates through all winners on every call. This function is called in requestWinner(), handleWinnerSelection(), setPrizeActive(), and view functions, creating O(n) overhead for each operation. For prizes with many winners, this could become expensive. Consider caching the valid count and updating it when winners are invalidated.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
for (uint256 i = 0; i < wins.length; i++) {
if (wins[i].winnerAddress == user && (!onlyUnclaimed || !wins[i].claimed)) {
// Also check that winner is not invalidated
if (wins[i].winnerAddress == user && !invalidWinners[prizeId][i] && (!onlyUnclaimed || !wins[i].claimed)) {
Copy link

Copilot AI Oct 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

[nitpick] This complex conditional with multiple && operators is difficult to parse. Consider extracting the invalidation check or other conditions into named boolean variables to improve readability, e.g., bool isValidWinner = !invalidWinners[prizeId][i];

Suggested change
if (wins[i].winnerAddress == user && !invalidWinners[prizeId][i] && (!onlyUnclaimed || !wins[i].claimed)) {
bool isWinner = wins[i].winnerAddress == user;
bool isValidWinner = !invalidWinners[prizeId][i];
bool isUnclaimedOrAll = !onlyUnclaimed || !wins[i].claimed;
if (isWinner && isValidWinner && isUnclaimedOrAll) {

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
@ungaro ungaro assigned ungaro and yogurtandjam and unassigned ungaro Oct 24, 2025
@yogurtandjam yogurtandjam merged commit dbe43fe into main Oct 29, 2025
2 checks passed
@yogurtandjam yogurtandjam deleted the alp/invalidate-winners branch October 29, 2025 18:18
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants