---
title: "Comment by For sell Mx on \"Preventing Denial of Service Attacks in Smart Contracts: Implementing the Withdrawal Pattern\" | Hashnode"
description: "I once spent hours debugging a \"stuck\" contract only to find a loop could be DOS'd by manipulating a public array. Your point about withdrawal patterns is spot-"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9/comment/69e6f0342a1914308f8d9168"
---

[Discussion](https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9)

Comment [Preventing Denial of Service Attacks in Smart Contracts: Implementing the Withdrawal Pattern](https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9)

[For sell Mx](https://hashnode.com/@mxsell)

[Apr 21](https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9/comment/69e6f0342a1914308f8d9168)

I once spent hours debugging a "stuck" contract only to find a loop could be DOS'd by manipulating a public array. Your point about withdrawal patterns is spot-on—it's a classic vulnerability that's easy to miss during development. Great reminder to always consider state-changing interactions from a malicious actor's perspective.