Skip to content

Issues: crytic/medusa

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clear current search query, filters, and sorts
10 Open 3 Closed
10 Open 3 Closed
Author
Filter by author
Loading
Label
Filter by label
Loading
Use alt + click/return to exclude labels
or ⇧ + click/return for logical OR
Projects
Filter by project
Loading
Milestones
Filter by milestone
Loading
Assignee
Filter by who’s assigned
Sort
Sort by
Newest Oldest Most commented Least commented Recently updated Least recently updated Best match
Most reactions
👍 👎 😄 🎉 😕 ❤️ 🚀 👀

Issues list

Investigate StateDB.GetCodeHash for coverage tracking medium-priority planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#610 opened Apr 7, 2025 by anishnaik
Investigate why medusa saves more corpus items than echidna high-priority not-an-issue planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#553 opened Feb 3, 2025 by anishnaik
Investigate only mutating one argument per function medium-priority not-an-issue planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#549 opened Feb 1, 2025 by anishnaik
Remove contract XXX statement in coverage low-priority planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#286 opened Jan 18, 2024 by 0xicingdeath
Calculate and show branch coverage per file planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet. very-low-priority
#285 opened Jan 17, 2024 by 0xicingdeath
Save coverage throughout execution medium-priority planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#280 opened Jan 10, 2024 by 0xicingdeath
Create capability to _call_ dynamically deployed contracts but not _test_ them planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet. very-low-priority
#254 opened Nov 8, 2023 by anishnaik
TBD: Fail on reverts good first issue Good for newcomers help wanted Extra attention is needed low-priority planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet.
#192 opened Aug 1, 2023 by anishnaik
Remaining TODOS for logging on hold This issue was marked as not desirable to complete for now planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet. very-low-priority
#188 opened Jul 31, 2023 by anishnaik
5 tasks
A better abstraction for executing a sequence of transacitons in the worker is needed on hold This issue was marked as not desirable to complete for now planning This issue is currently in a planning/discussion phase and should not be implemented yet. very-low-priority
#152 opened May 15, 2023 by gustavo-grieco
ProTip! Find all open issues with in progress development work with linked:pr.