feat: OFT/CCTP same chain deposits by fusmanii · Pull Request #1407 · across-protocol/contracts

fusmanii · 2026-04-08T20:12:29Z

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

grasphoper · 2026-04-08T20:43:44Z

+
+            address burnToken = quote.burnToken.toAddress();
+            IERC20(burnToken).safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, destinationHandler, quote.amount);
+            ISponsoredCCTPDstPeriphery(destinationHandler).directReceiveMessage(quote, signature);


We push tokens into the dst handler, this is why we require a new DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE.

I understand that this is a gas optimization over pulling two times (depositor -> srcPeriphery -> dstHandler.

Hmm, on OFT side, this also lands nicely with authorizedSrcPeripheryContracts, so that doesn't need a special role for direct deposits. We can just reuse authorizedSrcPeripheryContracts for same-chain deposit authorizations

grasphoper · 2026-04-08T20:45:04Z

    using AddressToBytes32 for address;
    using SafeERC20 for IERC20;

+    bytes32 public constant DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE = keccak256("DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE");


Can we reuse authorizedSrcPeripheryContracts instead?

I moved DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE to BaseModuleHandler.sol so both contracts get access to DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE
c5284cf

grasphoper · 2026-04-08T20:47:48Z

+import { Address } from "@openzeppelin/contracts-v4/utils/Address.sol";
+
+interface IDirectDstOFTHandler {
+    function executeDirect(address tokenSent, uint256 amountLD, bytes calldata composeMsg) external;
+}


Same here with the interface, can we e.g. reuse DstOFTHandler definition?

done
63062f2

grasphoper · 2026-04-08T20:49:27Z

    /// @notice Source endpoint id
    uint32 public immutable SRC_EID;
+    /// @notice OFT shared decimals used by this deployment.
+    uint8 public immutable SHARED_DECIMALS;


This looks unused

removed, not sure how it got there
63062f2#diff-2ca540606eddfd4ac0070e98060f462069e9097c17cadd84c584cd77e4dc9e7a

grasphoper · 2026-04-08T20:52:37Z

@codex please review this one. It adds the ability to deposit funds directly from the same chain, rather than using OFT/CCTP bridge to deposit and mint tokens cross-chain.

It allows us to reuse signature checking and binding functionality (e.g. Arbitrary EVM actions are bound to some received token amount via a signature)

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 83f0ba0ab7

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-08T21:00:20Z

+        if (quote.signedParams.dstEid == SRC_EID) {
+            address destinationHandler = address(uint160(uint256(quote.signedParams.destinationHandler)));


Reject or refund msg.value for direct OFT execution

In SponsoredOFTSrcPeriphery.deposit, the same-chain branch (dstEid == SRC_EID) skips all native-fee handling and never refunds msg.value, so any ETH sent with a direct quote is left in this contract permanently. This is a user-funds loss path if callers keep sending the bridge fee they use for cross-chain deposits (the previous flow always refunded surplus), and this contract has no withdrawal path for stuck ETH.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

@fusmanii hm, maybe force msg.value == 0 here?

good point, yeah forcing msg.value == 0 makes sense here

done 63062f2

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-08T21:00:20Z

+            address burnToken = quote.burnToken.toAddress();
+            IERC20(burnToken).safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, destinationHandler, quote.amount);
+            ISponsoredCCTPDstPeriphery(destinationHandler).directReceiveMessage(quote, signature);


Enforce base token for CCTP direct deposits

The direct CCTP source path transfers quote.burnToken to the destination handler and immediately calls directReceiveMessage, but the destination execution path does not validate that burnToken matches the handler’s baseToken and proceeds with base-token accounting. If a signed quote contains a mismatched burnToken and the handler already holds baseToken, the flow can consume that baseToken while accepting an unrelated token from the caller, which creates a drain/mis-accounting path under that input condition.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

done 63062f2

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

fusmanii · 2026-04-08T22:44:31Z

@codex re-review pls

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-04-08T22:50:18Z

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Delightful!

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

tbwebb22 · 2026-04-09T23:06:49Z

+        bytes memory signature
+    ) external nonReentrant authorizeFundedFlow onlyRole(DIRECT_CALLER_ROLE) {
+        if (quote.burnToken.toAddress() != baseToken) revert InvalidBurnToken();
+        _validateQuoteOrRevert(quote, signature);


nit, but we could remove the _validateQuoteOrRevert call here, and copy the logic from _validateQuoteOrRevert into here, minus the signature check, since we already did the signature check on SrcPeriphery. Right now we're checking the signature twice

great point, I could remove the sig param all together: f37c45b

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

feat: OFT/CCTP same chain deposits

83f0ba0

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

grasphoper reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

chatgpt-codex-connector bot reviewed Apr 8, 2026

View reviewed changes

fusmanii added 3 commits April 8, 2026 15:56

move role to HyperCoreFlowRoles

c5284cf

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

feedback

63062f2

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

use Bytes32ToAddress

88eda03

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

tests

ee0e5f6

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

fusmanii requested review from grasphoper and tbwebb22 April 9, 2026 17:30

fusmanii marked this pull request as ready for review April 9, 2026 17:30

fusmanii requested review from bmzig, mrice32, nicholaspai and pxrl as code owners April 9, 2026 17:30

tbwebb22 reviewed Apr 9, 2026

View reviewed changes

fusmanii added 2 commits April 10, 2026 09:30

match the new event params with old events

03efe34

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

remove sig validation in cctp dst

f37c45b

Signed-off-by: Faisal Usmani <faisal.of.usmani@gmail.com>

tbwebb22 self-requested a review April 10, 2026 22:11

tbwebb22 approved these changes Apr 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

fusmanii added the need to audit This PR needs to be audited externally before deploying label Apr 13, 2026

		if (quote.signedParams.dstEid == SRC_EID) {
		address destinationHandler = address(uint160(uint256(quote.signedParams.destinationHandler)));

Conversation

fusmanii commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

grasphoper commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot Apr 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

fusmanii commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector bot commented Apr 8, 2026

Uh oh!

tbwebb22 Apr 9, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

tbwebb22 Apr 9, 2026 •

edited

Loading