#26 Use safeTransfer instead of Transfer

Severity

Low Risk

Relevant GitHub Links

https://github.com/Cyfrin/2023-12-the-standard/blob/91132936cb09ef9bf82f38ab1106346e2ad60f91/contracts/LiquidationPoolManager.sol#L54C7-L54C7

https://github.com/Cyfrin/2023-12-the-standard/blob/91132936cb09ef9bf82f38ab1106346e2ad60f91/contracts/LiquidationPoolManager.sol#L40

https://github.com/Cyfrin/2023-12-the-standard/blob/91132936cb09ef9bf82f38ab1106346e2ad60f91/contracts/LiquidationPool.sol#L175C1-L175C1

Summary

using transfer for erc20 has been discouraged because return value can be different from reverting

Vulnerability Details

It is a good idea to add a require() statement that checks the return value of ERC20 token transfers or to use something like OpenZeppelin’s safeTransfer()/safeTransferFrom() unless one is sure the given token reverts in case of a failure. Failure to do so will cause silent failures of transfers and affect token accounting in contract.

• On another note, it is safe to maintain consistency through out the codebase as safeTransfer is used in some line of code while transfer is insecurely used in some

However, using require() to check transfer return values could lead to issues with non-compliant ERC20 tokens which do not return a boolean value. Therefore, it's highly advised to use OpenZeppelin’s safeTransfer()/safeTransferFrom().

Impact

Tools Used

Manual review

Recommendations

Use safeTransfer() or check the return value if length of returned data is > 0.