Assumptions are made about bAssets  Acknowledged
The code makes several assumptions about the bAssets that can be used. A malicious or malfunctioning asset contract might violate those assumptions. This might lead to unintended behavior in the system. Below there are several such assumptions:\\nDecimals of a bAsset are constant where the decimals are used to derive the asset's ratio:\\n```\\nuint256 bAsset\\_decimals = CommonHelpers.getDecimals(\\_bAsset);\\n```\\n\\nDecimals must be in a range from 4 to 18:\\n```\\nrequire(decimals >= 4 && decimals <= 18, "Token must have sufficient decimal places");\\n```\\n\\nThe governor is able to foresee when transfer fees are charged (which needs to be called if anything changes); in theory, assets could be much more flexible in when transfer fees are charged (for instance, during certain periods or for certain users)\\n```\\nfunction setTransferFeesFlag(address \\_bAsset, bool \\_flag)\\n```\\n\\nIt seems like some of these assumptions could be avoided, but there might be a cost. For instance, one could retrieve the decimals directly instead of “caching” them and one could always enable the setting where transfer fees may be charged.
Consider revisiting or avoiding these assumptions. For any assumptions that are there by design it would be good to document them to facilitate future changes.
```\\nuint256 bAsset\\_decimals = CommonHelpers.getDecimals(\\_bAsset);\\n```\\n