Emitting an event after ERC20 transfer is a possible re-entrancy exploit?

Smart Contracts
1

I'm interested to know; I received advice that emit event should be called before erc20 safeTransfer in my contract because of a possible re-entrancy attack. The offending code:

\\ checks
\\ effects
ERC20.safeTransfer(to, amount);
emit Rewarded(to, amount);

should be changed to:

\\ checks
\\ effects
emit Rewarded(to, amount);
ERC20.safeTransfer(to, amount);

I've never heard of event emitting after an erc20 transfer to be a potential security concern. Can anyone enlighten me?

2

as far as I am aware, emissions of events are not able to trigger functions, so this should not be a reentrancy vector

3

Agreed. If events can't be used to implement anything (balance change, function calls, etc), then there is surely no purpose to a re-entrancy attack targeting safeTransfer if the payoff is to manipulate whatever is happening in an event, I.e. emitting an event.