Add param to allow non lock owner to force unlock

[iboss-ptk]

What is the purpose of the change

To allow an account to forcibly unlock any lock, including ones they do not own, if their address is on the whitelist. This functionality is needed for transmigrator

Brief Changelog

• Add NonOwnerForceUnlockAddresses to lockup params
• By pass ownership check in ForceUnlock if msg sender is in NonOwnerForceUnlockAddresses

Testing and Verifying

This change added tests and can be verified as follows:

• Added unit test that validates if msg sender is in NonOwnerForceUnlockAddresses
  • they can force unlock their own locks
  • they can force unlock their other's locks

Documentation and Release Note

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature or user-facing behavior changes? (no)
• Is a relevant changelog entry added to the Unreleased section in CHANGELOG.md? (no)
• How is the feature or change documented? (not documented)

[ValarDragon]

What is the precise permission we need to expose, this feels too permissive to expose

[iboss-ptk]

@ValarDragon the contract needs to be able to:

unlock -> exit pool -> swap -> join pool -> lock

While retaining deposit period & needs to get everything unlocked locked back in some form.

The problem with existing approach is that if we authz ForceUnlock, msg.Owner will be the account that calls the contract, not the contract itself. If we can get authz MsgExec sender somehow (which is the contract in this case), that might be better approach since it can be more restrictive. I'm not sure if that is possible.

[mattverse]

feels like authz is a more preferrable way than using this method to me as well, @iboss-ptk do you need help on further investigation if this is possible?

[iboss-ptk]

@mattverse That would be helpful! I'm a bit lost in getting MsgExec sender info without modifying existing MsgForceUnlock. If there is a way for that, that would be ideal.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you!

[sunnya97]

@mattverse I don't see how authz would help here. Cause normal users don't have ability to force unlock, so they can't authz the ability to do that either

[sunnya97]

TODO: Allow breaking of superfluid as well

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you!

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you!

[p0mvn]

@iboss-ptk are we still planning to pursue this? If not, let's close.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had any recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you!