---
title: "Comment by For sell Mx on \"Preventing Denial of Service Attacks in Smart Contracts: Implementing the Withdrawal Pattern\" | Hashnode"
description: "Great post—this is a critical and often overlooked vector. One additional best practice is to implement a pull-over-push withdrawal pattern: let users claim the"
url: "https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9/comment/69f8b632735cece1869d1d27"
---

[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)

[May 4](https://hashnode.com/posts/preventing-denial-of-service-attacks-in-smart-contracts-implementing-the-withdrawal-pattern/67dd7bb9cf09a070e54cd8e9/comment/69f8b632735cece1869d1d27)

Great post—this is a critical and often overlooked vector. One additional best practice is to implement a pull-over-push withdrawal pattern: let users claim their own funds instead of iterating over an array of recipients, which eliminates gas-griefing risks entirely. Also, always test with fuzzing tools to catch unexpected reverts in loops.