Weekly overview of the bug-hunting category- week 48, 2018

5 comments

fego
64
15 days agoSteemit5 min read

This is a report on the weekly contributions to the bug hunting category. The post contain basic stats like the number of contributions received by the category, an excerpt on new contributors if there are any and a detailed comparison of the weeks output with previous weeks.

utopian (1).jpg

Previous Reports

Bug hunting contributions summary

  • Week 48: November 22nd - 29th
  • 1 Contribution
  • 1 new contributor, @victorier
  • An average score of 0

The contribution

ContributorURLProjectScore
@victorierError on "Estimated Account Value" in walletsteemit0

@victorier, a first-time contributor to the category, she discovered an estimation error in the steem wallet, in her words "either she's been made a millionaire or there was an error at play ", she hoped the former was the case :) . Unfortunately, a similar report had been submitted to the steemit/condenser issues page. The contribution was reviewed by @tobias-g who advised the new millionaire on how best to contribute to utopian.io and the bug-hunting category in particular.

First of all, it's great to see that you're trying to get involved with helping the Steemit team by reporting issues about the Condenser. I can even see that you reported this on Github (https://github.com/steemit/condenser/issues/3102) which is great. With that said this particular issue is not something that can be rewarded by Utopian, this is because of this particular issue has already been reported on GitHub prior to your report. This can be found here:

https://github.com/steemit/condenser/issues/3101

Though the contribution was tagged a duplicate, a fix was duly appropriated by the steemit team. The problem is explicitly explained below as it was also experienced in the steem-js library.

This line fails to divide by the quote part of the feed price ratio and therefore computes an incorrect price when the quote is not 1.000.

https://github.com/steemit/steem-js/blob/master/src/formatter.js#L103

This is the case currently as the consensus logic is adjusting the feed price to maintain the 10% SBD to STEEM market cap limit, resulting in a complex ratio: "median_sbd_price": { "base": "122615385.381 SBD", "quote": "283814541.914 STEEM" }. It could also occur if witnesses started reporting the price feed using a quote other than 1.000. For example, this could happen at very low STEEM prices, in order to enable more than three fractional digits.

This is now causing incorrect output in many UIs

Cause
        if (feed_price && feed_price.has('base') && feed_price.has('quote')) {
            const { base, quote } = feed_price.toJS();
            if (/ SBD$/.test(base) && / STEEM$/.test(quote))
                price_per_steem = parseFloat(base.split(' ')[0]);
                
        }

The error in estimation is as a result of this line price_per_steem = parseFloat(base.split(' ')[0]);

Fix

        if (feed_price && feed_price.has('base') && feed_price.has('quote')) {
            const { base, quote } = feed_price.toJS();
            if (/ SBD$/.test(base) && / STEEM$/.test(quote))
                price_per_steem =
                    parseFloat(base.split(' ')[0]) /
                    parseFloat(quote.split(' ')[0]);
        }

In summary, there was just one contribution to the category this week. Unfortunately, this was not scored as it was a duplicate of an already opened issue. There were no staff picks. The sole contribution was by a new contributor to the category, @victorier.

Hunter Totals and Average

bargraph 15.png

@mightypanda after five weeks is the most consistent of the hunters and still tops the bug-hunters table with 3 finds, @stmdev still sits pretty with the highest average reward score of 80 previously occupied by @mattockfs at 72.5.

Weekly Average Score and number of Contributions

bargraph 16.png

No contribution was scored this week, hence the week's average score is zero. The last time the average was zero was week 42 when no contribution was received by the category. Note that in the calculation of the averages of the previous weeks, the zero scored contributions are not included.

Reports Reviewed By Reviewer

bargraph 17.png
The 14 contributions received by the category in the past five weeks were assessed by three reviewers. Of the 14 contributions, 11 were rewarded.

  • @sachincool have now reviewed 2 contributions (40, 40) with an average score of 40.
  • @fego have reviewed 8 contributions (45.5, 72.5, 44.5, 80, 35.5, 80) with an average score of 54.2.
  • @tobias-g have reviewed 4 contributions (37.5, 65, 70) with an average score of 57.5.

Other items

In order to avoid getting a reward score of zero, bug hunters are advised to browse through the issues tracker page of any project on GitHub to confirm the uniqueness of the error and avoid duplicating an already reported issue.

For bug-hunters and open source enthusiasts looking to help open source projects, please take a look at our whitelist of projects that you can submit bug reports for:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1S7ayFTEy5CBMyeJvFRgq5JUjlqZxFjWAWhhrBL0GC60/edit#gid=1954068373


If you wish to have your open source projects added to our whitelist you can contact us on our help channel at our discord server. You can also leave your questions and comments below :)


Thanks

@fego

Comments

Sort byBest