AI-generated analysisPublished automatically and not human-verified. Validated context appears in community notes below.
← Watch feed
Low 35 Monero

quick fixes for swap logic across providers (#2702)

Public commit record

What the developer wrote

Authored by Serhii

81/100 · Strong
quick fixes for swap logic across providers (#2702)

* fix currency matching and network mapping

* add support for Arbitrum

* Update lib/exchange/provider/exolix_exchange_provider.dart [skip ci]

* Update lib/exchange/provider/exolix_exchange_provider.dart [skip ci]

---------

Co-authored-by: Serhii-Borodenko <17529954+Serhii-Borodenko@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Omar Hatem <omarh.ismail1@gmail.com>
✓ Specific, descriptive subject✓ Names a concrete action or component✓ Provides detailed explanatory context✓ Links an issue, advisory, or supporting reference
The short version

What changed, and why it matters

This commit fixes how Cake Wallet matches currencies and blockchain networks when displaying swap/exchange transactions from several third-party exchange providers. Before the fix, mismatched capitalization or inconsistent network names (for example 'Arbitrum' vs 'ARB') could cause the app to fail to identify the correct currency or network. This is a bug-fix patch that reduces the chance of user confusion or incorrect transaction details, but it does not appear to be a direct exploit fix. The commit also adds support for the Arbitrum network.

Recommended action

Treat as a routine functional bug-fix with secondary security benefit. Review whether any prior swap transactions could have been misidentified due to these parsing issues, and consider adding unit tests for currency/network normalization across providers. No urgent security response is indicated by the diff alone.

Security signals we found

01

Currency/network parsing normalization reduces risk of mismatched swap asset identification

02

Case-insensitive comparison added for currency/network matching

03

New network mapping for Arbitrum added across multiple providers

04

No explicit security advisory, CVE, or exploit disclosure present in commit or references

Risk score

Why this scored 35/100

Our methodology →
Potential impact 8/30
Exploitability 6/25
Stealth signal 5/15
Affected reach 7/15
Confidence 6/10
Evidence quality 3/5
Human-validated context

Community notes

Notes can correct, qualify, or add evidence to the AI analysis. Every note shown here has been validated by a human moderator.

No validated notes yet.

The AI analysis stands alone for now. Submit a note if you can add evidence or important context.