fix: budget cap dos

[0xOneTony]

Closes OPT-949

[linear]

OPT-949 [H-0] Permissionless proposals with budget caps can be DoS

[0xChin]

I think this comment should be in line 578 https://github.com/defi-wonderland/optimism/pull/453/files#diff-e08ec1b0a9b8fcf25969e83b9aa4058a4a4886602ab43175b02dd8e1b50e6a81R578

[cursor]

Bug: Proposal Validation Mismatch in Voting Cycle

The canApproveProposal function uses an inconsistent voting cycle for attestation validation compared to approveProposal. For ProtocolOrGovernorUpgrade proposals, approveProposal correctly uses the proposal's current votingCycle for validation, while canApproveProposal incorrectly always uses proposal.votingCycle - 1. This discrepancy can lead to canApproveProposal returning misleading results for these proposal types.

packages/contracts-bedrock/src/governance/ProposalValidator.sol#L637-L654

optimism/packages/contracts-bedrock/src/governance/ProposalValidator.sol

Lines 637 to 654 in 3348e3f

	/// @return canApprove_ True if the delegate can approve the proposal, false otherwise.
	function canApproveProposal(
	bytes32 _attestationUid,
	address _delegate,
	bytes32 _proposalHash
	)
	external
	view
	returns (bool canApprove_)
	{
	// TODO: this function should be fixed in OPT-957
	ProposalData storage proposal = _proposals[_proposalHash];
	if (proposal.votingCycle == 0) {
	return false;
	}
	canApprove_ = _validateTopDelegateAttestation(_attestationUid, _delegate, proposal.votingCycle - 1);
	}

Fix in Cursor • Fix in Web

---

Was this report helpful? Give feedback by reacting with 👍 or 👎