|
5 | 5 | | Created at | 2025-02-04 |
|
6 | 6 | | Initial Reviewers | AgusDuha |
|
7 | 7 | | Needs Approval From | Michael Amadi, Matt Solomon |
|
8 |
| -| Status | Implementing Actions | |
| 8 | +| Status | Final | |
9 | 9 |
|
10 | 10 | ## Introduction
|
11 | 11 |
|
@@ -117,17 +117,17 @@ See [fma-generic-contracts.md](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/design-docs/
|
117 | 117 | ## Action Items
|
118 | 118 |
|
119 | 119 | - [x] Resolve all the comments.
|
120 |
| -- [ ] FM1: Decide whether to implement any of the mitigation approaches described, either now or in the future. |
121 |
| -- [ ] FM1: Decide whether to implement a monitoring solution that tracks when a message is sent to a `destination` that is not part of the dependency set. |
122 |
| -- [ ] FM2: Implement a monitoring tool that tracks invalid/non-existent initiated messages. |
123 |
| -- [ ] FM3: Check for any L2Beat Stage 1 considerations related to the inability to successfully call `validateMessage` as part of a force-include a transaction. |
124 |
| -- [ ] FM3: Implement a mechanism that can execute `validateMessage` that is censorship-resistant to mitigate the current risks, as discussed [here](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/specs/issues/520). |
125 |
| -- [ ] FM3: Implement a monitoring tool that tracks and flags initiated messages that are not relayed despite being ready. |
126 |
| -- [ ] FM4: Implement a monitoring tool that alerts when relayed events are repeated. |
127 |
| -- [ ] FM5: Implement a monitoring tool that alerts successful reentrancies. |
128 |
| -- [ ] FM6: Ensure that the Interop documentation for developers explains the possibility of repeated identifiers being validated during a `validatedMessage`, the role of `L2ToL2CrossDomainMessenger`, and whether replay protections are required, depending on the expected use case when developing custom messengers. |
129 |
| -- [ ] Write a FMA for `op-supervisor`, as this component is critical and transversal to many of the cases explained, since its failure could degrade liveness or the safety of interop. |
130 |
| -- [ ] Ensure the support team is aware of these failure modes and prepared to respond. |
| 120 | +- [x] FM1: Decide whether to implement any of the mitigation approaches described, either now or in the future. (re-introduce the L2 Dependency manager predeploy in the future) |
| 121 | +- [x] FM1: Decide whether to implement a monitoring solution that tracks when a message is sent to a `destination` that is not part of the dependency set. (tracked on [Interop Monitoring issue](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/issues/15178)) |
| 122 | +- [x] FM2: Implement a monitoring tool that tracks invalid/non-existent initiated messages. (tracked on [Interop Monitoring issue](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/issues/15178)) |
| 123 | +- [x] FM3: Check for any L2Beat Stage 1 considerations related to the inability to successfully call `validateMessage` as part of a force-include a transaction. (tracked in the [Censorship Resistance issue](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/specs/issues/520)) |
| 124 | +- [x] FM3: Implement a mechanism that can execute `validateMessage` that is censorship-resistant to mitigate the current risks, as discussed [here](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/specs/issues/520). |
| 125 | +- [x] FM3: Implement a monitoring tool that tracks and flags initiated messages that are not relayed despite being ready. (tracked on [Interop Monitoring issue](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/optimism/issues/15178)) |
| 126 | +- [x] FM4: Implement a monitoring tool that alerts when relayed events are repeated. (Covered by tests no monitoring solution) |
| 127 | +- [x] FM5: Implement a monitoring tool that alerts successful reentrancies. (Covered by tests no monitoring solution) |
| 128 | +- [x] FM6: Ensure that the Interop documentation for developers explains the possibility of repeated identifiers being validated during a `validatedMessage`, the role of `L2ToL2CrossDomainMessenger`, and whether replay protections are required, depending on the expected use case when developing custom messengers. (The current documentation is in [Interop docs](https://docs.optimism.io/stack/interop/message-passing)) |
| 129 | +- [x] Write a FMA for `op-supervisor`, as this component is critical and transversal to many of the cases explained, since its failure could degrade liveness or the safety of interop. (Follow in [Supervisor FMA PR](https://github.com/ethereum-optimism/design-docs/pull/233)) |
| 130 | +- [x] Ensure the support team is aware of these failure modes and prepared to respond. |
131 | 131 |
|
132 | 132 | ## Audit Requirements
|
133 | 133 |
|
|
0 commit comments