have found it apart from Lee?
They can call the function, I think
it's an copy version from bsc. Almost every contract contain the similar function.
if you don't trust me, just open the CMC and look into github.
Yes I don't trust you. I don't know code enough to wander into github. So every contract has this bug is is exploitable on bsc?
And I feel sorry for being a unmature programmer.
There are many known exploits for Solidity contracts, so if the git hash is the same as for the contract you can see if it was bad practice or intentionally a malicious code snippet.
So what is your view? Bad practice or malicious?
I have already sent the link to Khushal that my gf sent wrong.
You should remove t-eagles from your name? And let us know when you have paid back?
you are right, and I am talking with Khushak
Code reviews protect both developers and users. Consider to get your code reviewed by one or more experienced developers before deploying it. Just my two cents.
You are right. Sorry for my mistake.
No way to say unless code is reviewed, most likely an honest mistake and then a series of events that could have been handled better by the dev, as Khush describes it. But let them work it out, as of now none of us have details except the involved ones, and rumors is bad either way.
Ok I'll leave it. Thankfully I'm not affected. But if I was, there is no benefit of doubt from what I read
sure, that is a base ERC20 function, but still depends on how you implemented it and short of publishing the code it takes some efforts to reverse the function.
that's right , I am so sorry for omitting some important protection
They need the abi
Обсуждают сегодня