-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
QA Report #15
Comments
OpenCoreCH marked the issue as selected for report |
OpenCoreCH marked the issue as grade-a |
OpenCoreCH marked the issue as not selected for report |
Hi @OpenCoreCH 1.
However, I think the root cause here is that the function allows withdrawal of unapproved long-term rental. The token owner should be able to reject active long-term reservations as this could be used to free up availability in case of violation on rental agreement. The token owner should have more authority than the renter in long-term rental because they can't demand a full payment for the total rental period (it doesn't make sense to do so, you don't pay 12 months in advance for renting an apartment for a year). To illustrate my point, if the renter were to miss their payment for three months, they might face an eviction in the real world, Similarly, they must be evicted on the smart contract as well. 2.
The specific nature of the malicious cancellation policy is irrelevant. It could be a large-size vector or a cancellation fee of 100% or more. It would still prevent renter from cancelling their reservation. I submitted this issue as a Low severity because
|
For awarding purposes, C4 staff have marked as |
See the markdown file with the details of this report here.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: