QA Report

[howlbot-integration]

See the markdown file with the details of this report here.

[c4-judge]

alex-ppg marked the issue as grade-c

[JeffCX]

I politely think the QA report should not only be graded based on quantity, but quality as well

because I see other report that marked as grade-b has a lot of false positive - I mean if the finding is about a piece of code that is not changed from uniswap v3, the code should stays that way and it is not a bug.

also something finding are captured by bot and should be OOS, a example is:

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-10-ronin/blob/main/4naly3er-report.md#m-3--solmates-safetransferlib-does-not-check-for-token-contracts-existence

(II am not saying those grade-b report are all invalid because one OOS finding, again I just think that the QA report should not only be graded based on quantity, but quality as well)

I politely think the report deserves a grade b because it provide some insight that no other report provides.

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-10-ronin-findings/blob/main/data/minglei-wang-3570-Q.md

[alex-ppg]

Hey @JeffCX, thanks for your PJQA contribution. The new QA guidelines indicate that only low-risk submissions are considered valid for assessing a grade. The first item in the QA report is not a low-risk item nor is one to be considered as the code has already copied Uniswap V3.

The second item is once again incorrect as it mimics the original codebase and no scenario has been demonstrated whereby the underflow may occur.

The third item is once again behavior in the original Uniswap V3 codebase that is generally acceptable and cannot constitute a low-risk item.