If the upgrade process is too centralized, it creates a single point of failure, and generally considered unethical to the users
Game
Web3 does not like centralized stuff. What are the risks in this contract?
// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
// Open me in VSCode and really think before opening the hints!
// Add @audit tags wherever suspicious
// Go to the solidity docs to complete missing knowledge of what's happening here
// Solve by drafting a fix!
pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
contract CentralizedProxy {
address public implementation;
address public admin;
constructor(address _implementation) {
implementation = _implementation;
admin = msg.sender;
}
function updateImplementation(address newImplementation) public {
require(msg.sender == admin, "Only admin can update the implementation");
implementation = newImplementation;
}
// Fallback function that forwards calls to the implementation contract
fallback() external payable {
(bool success, ) = implementation.delegatecall(msg.data);
require(success, "Delegatecall failed");
}
}
Consider how decentralizing control over updates or requiring multiple approvals could mitigate the risk of a single point of failure.
Multi-signature wallets or decentralized governance mechanisms are common solutions for critical operations that need more security and transparency.
contract DecentralizedProxy {
address public implementation;
address public admin;
constructor(address _implementation, address _admin) {
implementation = _implementation;
admin = _admin; // Fix: Set multi-signature wallet or governance contract as the admin
}
function updateImplementation(address newImplementation) public {
require(msg.sender == admin, "Only admin (multi-sig) can update the implementation");
implementation = newImplementation;
}
fallback() external payable {
(bool success, ) = implementation.delegatecall(msg.data);
require(success, "Delegatecall failed");
}
}