0

was going through this [nft smartcontract][1]

function withdrawMoney() external onlyOwner nonReentrant {
(bool success, ) = msg.sender.call{value: address(this).balance}("");
require(success, "Transfer failed."); }

Rentrancy is attack done from another smart contract and method is already onlyOwner, so
what is the purpose of nonReentrant modifier? [1]: https://etherscan.io/address/0xed5af388653567af2f388e6224dc7c4b3241c544#code

1 Answer 1

0

It's not because there already is onlyOwner that you don't need to add a nonReentrant. A smart contract should also prove to its users that an owner cannot cheat.

Here, because the whole contract balance is sent to the caller, it is impossible to withdraw it twice anyway.

What is still possible is to call the function repeatedly for nothing but a waste of gas and going deeper into the call stack. Both could be feared as attack vectors. And that is perhaps what the super cautious developer had in mind.

The same could probably be achieved, at less cost, with:

require(address(this).balance > 0);

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.