Breakage analysis per dependency
M^0's assessment for RD-F-052 — scored yellow on the v1.7.0 rubric. The evidence below is the curator's reasoning for this score.
Evidence summary #
HubPortal compromise = unbacked $M minting risk on spoke chains with no rate-limiter (NttManagerNoRateLimiting design); Registrar failure = protocol parameter reads fail; rate model revert = minting transactions revert (no silent bad-price risk); collateral Validator failure = new minting halts; SwapFacility failure = periphery only, core unaffected. The no-rate-limiter design is the primary residual risk.
Sources #
- DocsM^0 Cross-Chain Documentationdocs.m0.org/get-started/cross-chain/ — lock-and-mint architecture descriptionretrieved 2026-05-16
- Portal.sol sourcem0-foundation/m-portal main/src/Portal.sol — inherits NttManagerNoRateLimiting, explicitly removing rate limitingretrieved 2026-05-16
Methodology #
Produce a short per-dependency text describing which protocol functions halt or degrade and impact severity if each declared dependency fails.
See the full factor methodology and distribution across all protocols →