Blockchain Exam CBDE Topic 4 Question 101 Discussion

Actual exam question for Blockchain's CBDE exam

Question #: 101
Topic #: 4

[All CBDE Questions]

Using selfdestruct(beneficiary) with the beneficiary being a contract without a payable fallback function:

Awill throw an exception, because the fallback function is non-payable and thus cannot receive ether.

Bit's impossible to secure a contract against receiving ether, because selfdestruct will always send ether to the address in the argument. This is a design decision of the Ethereum platform.

Cselfdestruct doesn't send anything to a contract, it just re-assigns the owner of the contract to a new person. Sending ether must be done outside of selfdestruct.

Show Suggested Answer

Suggested Answer: B

by Bernardo at Sep 17, 2024, 07:50 PM

Limited Time Offer

25%

Off

Get Premium CBDE Questions as Interactive Web-Based Practice Test or PDF

Contribute your Thoughts:

Submit Cancel

Monroe

5 months ago

I'll go with Option A. It's the only one that actually makes sense from a technical standpoint. The other options seem like they were written by people who don't really understand how Solidity works.

upvoted 0 times

...

Roy

5 months ago

Haha, Option C is just silly. Selfdestruct definitely sends ether, it's not just a way to change ownership. These options are getting more and more ridiculous!

upvoted 0 times

Nan

4 months ago

C) selfdestruct doesn't send anything to a contract, it just re-assigns the owner of the contract to a new person. Sending ether must be done outside of selfdestruct.

upvoted 0 times

...

Ilene

4 months ago

Haha, Option C is just silly. Selfdestruct definitely sends ether, it's not just a way to change ownership. These options are getting more and more ridiculous!

upvoted 0 times

...

Lavonne

4 months ago

B) it's impossible to secure a contract against receiving ether, because selfdestruct will always send ether to the address in the argument. This is a design decision of the Ethereum platform.

upvoted 0 times

...

Laquanda

4 months ago

Haha, Option C is just silly. Selfdestruct definitely sends ether, it's not just a way to change ownership. These options are getting more and more ridiculous!

upvoted 0 times

...

Lizette

4 months ago

A) will throw an exception, because the fallback function is non-payable and thus cannot receive ether.

upvoted 0 times

...

Annabelle

5 months ago

B) it's impossible to secure a contract against receiving ether, because selfdestruct will always send ether to the address in the argument. This is a design decision of the Ethereum platform.

upvoted 0 times

...

Lindsay

5 months ago

A) will throw an exception, because the fallback function is non-payable and thus cannot receive ether.

upvoted 0 times

...

Erasmo

5 months ago

I think the answer is C, because selfdestruct only re-assigns the owner of the contract.

upvoted 0 times

...

Abel

5 months ago

I disagree, I believe the answer is B. Ethereum platform always sends ether to the address in the argument.

upvoted 0 times

...

Chau

5 months ago

I think Option B is the right answer. Ethereum's design doesn't allow you to prevent a contract from receiving ether through selfdestruct, it's a fundamental feature.

upvoted 0 times

Val

5 months ago

I think Option B is the right answer. Ethereum's design doesn't allow you to prevent a contract from receiving ether through selfdestruct, it's a fundamental feature.

upvoted 0 times

...

Rodolfo

5 months ago

B) it's impossible to secure a contract against receiving ether, because selfdestruct will always send ether to the address in the argument. This is a design decision of the Ethereum platform.

upvoted 0 times

...