Updates Eigenlayer integration #114
Conversation
|
|
||
| eigenPod = eigenLayerPodManager.createPod(); | ||
| owner = _owner; | ||
| withdrawalAddress = _withdrawalAddress; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
should we check for address(0) ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it's checked in the factory
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could anyone do something weird like deploy a clone of this contract by using something other than our factory contract for doing so and manage to do something malicious? (In this case, I think subverting the factory to set your withdrawal address to 0 isn't smart/malicious, so not a problem, just asking here)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not possible, since the deployer address is included in create2
| ); | ||
| /// Creates a minimal proxy clone of implementation | ||
| /// @param owner address of owner | ||
| /// @param withdrawalAddress address of withdrawalAddress |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just for my understanding, we're separating out the ability to control the controller contract to owner, and then setting another address for the funds to flow to (withdrawalAddress), which in practice could be an OWR or a SplitProxy? Out of interest, in a standard eigenpodcontroller, there is no distinction between the controller and recipient of funds, and this is functionality we are adding, right?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, that's correct
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The withdrawal address can be either an OWR or SplitProxy
Summary
Adds owr and split integration tests. Abstract withdrawal logic
Details