Spot the vuln - Challenge 1

[_blockchainer_]

Please login or register to view this content

[BULL]

how to contact you?

[_blockchainer_]

how to contact you?

Post your answer as reply. I'll check the time to award the first one to answer.

[BULL]

function _approve(address owner, address spender, uint256 amount) internal virtual {
    require(spender != address(0), "ERC20: approve from the zero address");
    require(owner != address(0), "ERC20: approve to the zero address");
    _allowances[owner][spender] += amount;
    emit Approval(owner, spender, amount);
}

[BULL]

The changes I made:

1. Added a comma between spender and uint256 amount in the function signature.

2.Changed the address 6 to 0, which is the correct address for the zero address.

3.Removed the unnecessary single quotes around spender and uint256.

4. Fixed the indexing of _allowances by removing the space between [owner] and [spender].

[_blockchainer_]

The changes I made:

1. Added a comma between spender and uint256 amount in the function signature.

2.Changed the address 6 to 0, which is the correct address for the zero address.

3.Removed the unnecessary single quotes around spender and uint256.

4. Fixed the indexing of _allowances by removing the space between [owner] and [spender].

sorry not, I don't even understand all of this claims. can you please elaborate.

[_blockchainer_]

function _approve(address owner, address spender, uint256 amount) internal virtual {
    require(spender != address(0), "ERC20: approve from the zero address");
    require(owner != address(0), "ERC20: approve to the zero address");
    _allowances[owner][spender] += amount;
    emit Approval(owner, spender, amount);
}

This is same code ,I don't see a difference.