Cross-chain Strategy #2715

shahthepro · 2025-12-11T10:38:06Z

Code Changes

Check readme: https://github.com/OriginProtocol/origin-dollar/blob/shah/cross-chain-strategy-cctpv2/contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/crosschain-strategy.md

codecov · 2025-12-12T11:28:20Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 86.00583% with 48 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 43.65%. Comparing base (0329064) to head (2178676).
⚠️ Report is 3 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...strategies/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategy.sol	72.34%	26 Missing ⚠️
...s/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol	90.65%	9 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol	88.50%	10 Missing ⚠️
...s/contracts/strategies/Generalized4626Strategy.sol	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2715      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   39.40%   43.65%   +4.25%     
==========================================
  Files         126      133       +7     
  Lines        5789     6132     +343     
  Branches     1537     1634      +97     
==========================================
+ Hits         2281     2677     +396     
+ Misses       3506     3452      -54     
- Partials        2        3       +1

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

sparrowDom · 2025-12-15T11:52:03Z

contracts/contracts/mocks/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategyMock.sol

+pragma solidity ^0.8.0;
+
+/**
+ * @title OUSD Yearn V3 Remote Strategy Mock - the Mainnet part


"- the Mainnet part" should probably be "- the L2 chain part"

contracts/contracts/mocks/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategyMock.sol

sparrowDom · 2025-12-16T12:05:01Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+    address public immutable cctpHookWrapper;
+
+    // USDC address on local chain
+    address public immutable baseToken;


we can rename this to usdcToken?

That's a good point. Since we would only be dealing with USDC with CCTP

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

* fix deploy files * minor rename * add calls to Morpho Vault into a try catch * refactor hook wrapper * don't revert if withdraw from underlying fails * use checkBalance for deposit/withdrawal acknowledgment * update message in remote strategy * remove unneeded functions

naddison36

This is my first pass of the contracts

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T04:29:01Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+    using SafeERC20 for IERC20;
+    using CrossChainStrategyHelper for bytes;
+
+    // Remote strategy balance


nit: lets make this Natspec with /// @notice

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T04:29:19Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+    // Remote strategy balance
+    uint256 public remoteStrategyBalance;
+
+    // Amount that's bridged but not yet received on the destination chain


nit: can be Natspec with /// @notice

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T05:21:17Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+    // USDC address on local chain
+    address public immutable baseToken;
+
+    // Domain ID of the chain from which messages are accepted


nit: best to make all these comments on public variables a Natspec with /// @notice

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T05:22:42Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+    // Domain ID of the chain from which messages are accepted
+    uint32 public immutable peerDomainID;
+
+    // Strategy address on other chain


nit: I'd add the example values. eg Ethereum 0, Base 6

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T05:24:54Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+    // Strategy address on other chain
+    address public immutable peerStrategy;
+
+    // CCTP params


nit: a link to the CCTP
Finality thresholds would be good here https://developers.circle.com/cctp/technical-guide#finality-thresholds

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T06:07:00Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+        }
+    }
+
+    /// @inheritdoc InitializableAbstractStrategy


nit: I think its better to have CrossChainMasterStrategy specific Natspec. eg _recipient must be the vault and _asset must be USDC.

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T06:10:57Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+     */
+    function _deposit(address _asset, uint256 depositAmount) internal virtual {
+        require(_asset == baseToken, "Unsupported asset");
+        require(!isTransferPending(), "Transfer already pending");


nit: it feels safer to have this check in _getNextNonce

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T06:13:02Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+        require(_asset == baseToken, "Unsupported asset");
+        require(!isTransferPending(), "Transfer already pending");
+        require(pendingAmount == 0, "Unexpected pending amount");
+        require(depositAmount > 0, "Deposit amount must be greater than 0");


nit: can be shortened to Must deposit something which is what a lot of other strategies use

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T06:14:20Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+        require(depositAmount > 0, "Deposit amount must be greater than 0");
+        require(
+            depositAmount <= MAX_TRANSFER_AMOUNT,
+            "Deposit amount exceeds max transfer amount"


nit: can be shortened to Deposit amount exceeds max so it fits in an EVM word

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategy.sol

naddison36 · 2026-01-02T06:50:53Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategy.sol

+
+    /**
+     * @notice Set address of Strategist.
+     *         This is important to have the function name same as IVault.


Is this saying the Strategist needs to be the vaultAddress?

The constructor states

// Vault address must always be the proxy address // so that IVault(vaultAddress).strategistAddr() works

Nope. I think I could've worded this better, I'll change it.

So, the problem is that the Generalized4626Strategy uses IVault.strategistAddr(). However the remote strategy has no Vault, it only communicates with the Master strategy. So, whenever IVault.strategistAddr() is used in the abstract strategy, it'll revert. So, what I did is add a function with same signature as strategistAddr(), so whenever IVault.strategistAddr() is called, it'll be same as calling address(this).strategistAddr().

Strategist should always be the 2/8 multisig. But for Remote strategy, the Vault should be its own proxy addresss

I see now. So the CrossChainRemoteStrategy constructor should check
_baseConfig.vaultAddress == address(this)

clement-ux

First surface pass

clement-ux · 2025-12-29T07:24:20Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+    // Operator address: Can relay CCTP messages
+    address public operator;


Global comment about slot arrangement, maybe we can:

Move MAX_TRANSFER_AMOUNT above cctpMessageTransmitter to keep order: constant -> immutable -> variable

cast minFinalityThreshold and feePremiumBps into uint16.

move nonceProcessed bellow operator

pack minFinalityThreshold, feePremiumBps and lastTransferNonce all together in a single slot.

clement-ux · 2025-12-29T07:39:16Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+        require(
+            minFinalityThreshold == 1000,
+            "Unfinalized messages are not supported"
+        );


Quick question, what's the reason for only supporting fast transfer and not standard transfer?

clement-ux · 2026-01-02T09:38:04Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

+// CCTP Message Header fields
+// Ref: https://developers.circle.com/cctp/technical-guide#message-header
+uint8 constant VERSION_INDEX = 0;
+uint8 constant SOURCE_DOMAIN_INDEX = 4;
+uint8 constant SENDER_INDEX = 44;
+uint8 constant RECIPIENT_INDEX = 76;
+uint8 constant MESSAGE_BODY_INDEX = 148;
+
+// Message body V2 fields
+// Ref: https://developers.circle.com/cctp/technical-guide#message-body
+// Ref: https://github.com/circlefin/evm-cctp-contracts/blob/master/src/messages/v2/BurnMessageV2.sol
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_VERSION_INDEX = 0;
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_RECIPIENT_INDEX = 36;
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_AMOUNT_INDEX = 68;
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_MESSAGE_SENDER_INDEX = 100;
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_FEE_EXECUTED_INDEX = 164;
+uint8 constant BURN_MESSAGE_V2_HOOK_DATA_INDEX = 228;


nit: Shouldn't we create a Library for these constants?

And maybe we could move this function into the library too:

origin-dollar/contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol

Lines 452 to 479 in b2feed1

/**

* @dev Decodes the CCTP message header

* @param message Message to decode

* @return version Version of the message

* @return sourceDomainID Source domain ID

* @return sender Sender of the message

* @return recipient Recipient of the message

* @return messageBody Message body

*/

function _decodeMessageHeader(bytes memory message)

internal

pure

returns (

uint32 version,

uint32 sourceDomainID,

address sender,

address recipient,

bytes memory messageBody

)

{

version = message.extractUint32(VERSION_INDEX);

sourceDomainID = message.extractUint32(SOURCE_DOMAIN_INDEX);

// Address of MessageTransmitterV2 caller on source domain

sender = message.extractAddress(SENDER_INDEX);

// Address to handle message body on destination domain

recipient = message.extractAddress(RECIPIENT_INDEX);

messageBody = message.extractSlice(MESSAGE_BODY_INDEX, message.length);

}

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

clement-ux · 2026-01-02T09:48:16Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+        uint256 undepositedUSDC = IERC20(baseToken).balanceOf(address(this));
+        return undepositedUSDC + pendingAmount + remoteStrategyBalance;


nit: I don't think it is necessary to cache undepositedUSDC, we can directly have:

return IERC20(baseToken).balanceOf(address(this)) + pendingAmount + remoteStrategyBalance;

clement-ux · 2026-01-02T10:23:08Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+            _markNonceAsProcessed(nonce);
+
+            // Effect of confirming a deposit, reset pending amount
+            pendingAmount = 0;


gas: delete pendingAmount should be cheaper than pendingAmount = 0;

clement-ux · 2026-01-02T10:29:35Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategy.sol

+    /// @inheritdoc Generalized4626Strategy
+    function withdrawAll() external virtual override onlyGovernorOrStrategist {
+        uint256 contractBalance = IERC20(baseToken).balanceOf(address(this));
+        uint256 balance = checkBalance(baseToken) - contractBalance;
+        _withdraw(address(this), baseToken, balance);
+    }


It fetches IERC20(baseToken).balanceOf(address(this)) two times, one at line 139, once again in checkBalance.
Maybe we can have something like this:

function withdrawAll() external virtual override onlyGovernorOrStrategist { _withdraw(address(this), baseToken, IERC4626(platformAddress).previewRedeem(platform.balanceOf(address(this)))); }

contracts/contracts/utils/BytesHelper.sol

clement-ux · 2026-01-05T11:49:50Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+    // Remote strategy balance
+    uint256 public remoteStrategyBalance;
+
+    // Amount that's bridged but not yet received on the destination chain
+    uint256 public pendingAmount;


Maybe we can downcast them to uint128 or uint64, because USDC has only 6 decimals, and then use just one slot.
However, this is maybe not worth it.

The max value that can be here is 10M USDC (10M * 10**6), so yeah it can fit in uint64, let me think about it. Because it might cause problems, if we ever decide to use this strategy for OETH

Yes exactly, that's why it could be not worth it. Choose the solution you prefer.

clement-ux

Adding some comments

clement-ux · 2026-01-05T14:45:45Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+    function _onMessageReceived(bytes memory payload) internal override {
+        uint32 messageType = payload.getMessageType();
+        if (messageType == CrossChainStrategyHelper.BALANCE_CHECK_MESSAGE) {
+            // Received when Remote strategy checks the balance
+            _processBalanceCheckMessage(payload);
+        } else {
+            revert("Unknown message type");
+        }


Maybe we can have something lighter and a bit more gas friendly:

function _onMessageReceived(bytes memory payload) internal override { require( payload.getMessageType() == CrossChainStrategyHelper.BALANCE_CHECK_MESSAGE, "Unknown message type" ); _processBalanceCheckMessage(payload); }

clement-ux · 2026-01-05T15:31:38Z

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

+        require(_asset == baseToken, "Unsupported asset");
+        require(_amount > 0, "Withdraw amount must be greater than 0");
+        require(_recipient == vaultAddress, "Only Vault can withdraw");
+        require(!isTransferPending(), "Transfer already pending");


It seems that checking if there is a "Transfer already pending" is checked two times:

require(!isTransferPending(), "Transfer already pending");

_getNextNonce()

I agree that having two times the check is not bad, but this means that we could probably lighten the code somewhere.
Should it be on the _getNextNonce()or on the _deposit()/_withdraw(), I let you be the judge.

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainMasterStrategy.sol

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategy.sol

sparrowDom and others added 5 commits December 5, 2025 14:54

some scaffolding

637fb40

add basic necessities for unit tests

7630f6d

checkpoint

6a97767

Fix compiling issues

9517fca

Add fork test scaffolding

41f1fd9

shahthepro added 5 commits December 13, 2025 00:30

Fix stuffs

7a109cc

Prettify and change salt

48d317e

Add auto-verification

c6a254a

Fix checkBalance

8f4e39e

Make CCTPHookWrapper more resilient

f7a9b97

sparrowDom reviewed Dec 15, 2025

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/mocks/crosschain/CrossChainRemoteStrategyMock.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

refactor message version and type checks

b3c1eb4

sparrowDom reviewed Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol Show resolved Hide resolved

sparrowDom reviewed Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol Show resolved Hide resolved

sparrowDom reviewed Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol Show resolved Hide resolved

sparrowDom reviewed Dec 16, 2025

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/strategies/crosschain/AbstractCCTPIntegrator.sol Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sparrowDom and others added 11 commits December 16, 2025 16:50

add some comments

d3c4a39

add comment

792c890

fix compile errors

70166bc

Change addresses

1e700b1

Merge branch 'master' into shah/cross-chain-strategy-cctpv2

ada1546

Fix compilation issues

987dc0a

Fix deployment files a bit

b63bd5f

Fix Message relayer

bf1fbe2

Clean up master strategy

a0dd07b

Fix deployment file name

4071943

shahthepro added 4 commits December 26, 2025 12:29

Fix comment

5ac664c

Fix failing unit test

b16c7fd

fix: withdraw only if balance is lower than requested amount

a4c2968

Document crosschain strategy

fca3df2

naddison36 reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

shahthepro added 2 commits January 2, 2026 10:36

Merge branch 'master' into shah/cross-chain-strategy-cctpv2

e322fe3

Update deployment file numbers

b2feed1

naddison36 reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

clement-ux reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

sparrowDom reviewed Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

contracts/contracts/utils/BytesHelper.sol Show resolved Hide resolved

clement-ux reviewed Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

sparrowDom added 2 commits January 5, 2026 16:52

adjust the charts

4150f9a

change the function visibility to pure

7c32c01

clement-ux reviewed Jan 5, 2026

View reviewed changes

shahthepro added 5 commits January 5, 2026 20:22

fix: create2 proxy without using deployer address

cbc0745

fix: impersonate a single deployer on fork

8bd5edc

deploy script bug fix

4557836

Store create2 proxy addresses

31b9f50

fix: await

057bd78

shahthepro changed the title ~~[WIP] Cross-chain Strategy~~ Cross-chain Strategy Jan 5, 2026

shahthepro and others added 10 commits January 5, 2026 21:13

more logging

f4bff9e

fix opts

2948739

Fix env for deploy action

801eacf

Change writeFileSync to writeFile

8d9ace2

add log

cb19da2

Add more logs

8dd21bd

fix callback

b54ef4b

Add empty file

c0a277e

Cleanup logs

bfb411c

withdraw funds according to the spec

2178676

		// Operator address: Can relay CCTP messages
		address public operator;

	/**
	* @dev Decodes the CCTP message header
	* @param message Message to decode
	* @return version Version of the message
	* @return sourceDomainID Source domain ID
	* @return sender Sender of the message
	* @return recipient Recipient of the message
	* @return messageBody Message body
	*/
	function _decodeMessageHeader(bytes memory message)
	internal
	pure
	returns (
	uint32 version,
	uint32 sourceDomainID,
	address sender,
	address recipient,
	bytes memory messageBody
	)
	{
	version = message.extractUint32(VERSION_INDEX);
	sourceDomainID = message.extractUint32(SOURCE_DOMAIN_INDEX);
	// Address of MessageTransmitterV2 caller on source domain
	sender = message.extractAddress(SENDER_INDEX);
	// Address to handle message body on destination domain
	recipient = message.extractAddress(RECIPIENT_INDEX);
	messageBody = message.extractSlice(MESSAGE_BODY_INDEX, message.length);
	}

		uint256 undepositedUSDC = IERC20(baseToken).balanceOf(address(this));
		return undepositedUSDC + pendingAmount + remoteStrategyBalance;

Cross-chain Strategy #2715

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Cross-chain Strategy #2715

Conversation

shahthepro commented Dec 11, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Code Changes

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Dec 12, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

naddison36 left a comment

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!

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!

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!

clement-ux left a comment

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!

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!

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!

clement-ux left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

shahthepro commented Dec 11, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Dec 12, 2025 •

edited

Loading