Inconsistent Use of Error Handling in LlamaAccount Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: The LlamaAccount contract contains a bug that allows an attacker to execute arbitrary calls with the delegatecall opcode, which can lead to unintended consequences and potential security vulnerabilities. Steps to Reproduce: Deploy the LlamaAccount...

The initial total supply of the role can be miscalculated in some cases

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to miscalculations during LlamaPolicy contract deployment the initial supply of the role can be set wrongly. And most of strategies will not work as intended. Moreover users will not be able to start an Action for some strategies as well. Proof of...

Legacy version check should be removed to avoid double relaying message in CrossDomainMessager.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Legacy version check should be removed to avoid double relaying message Proof of Concept In Optimism bedrock implementation, to handle the pre-bedrock migration, there is code check to make sure the transaction that finalized and relayed in pre-bedrock...

When deploying a contract in PermissionlessNodeRegistry.deployNodeELRewardVault(), an attacker can find out in advance the address of the future deployed contract and deploy his own at this address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The address of the new contract depends solely on the salt parameter, which is calculated from user-provided data. Once a user's create transaction is broadcast, the parameters for calculating salt can be viewed by anyone viewing the public mempool. This...

Aunction DOS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All auction functions are under a potential DOS or exploitability vulnerability A 2 day duration is added to the current block.number when creating a lot. This introduces a critical flaw, Adding 2 86400correct value of 2 days / 27200wrong value used in...

depositERC20To() and withdrawTo() is missing onlyEOA() modifier - Leading to loss of user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact StandardBridge.sol contract has a modifier called onlyEOA. The comment says 132 / 133 @notice Only allow EOAs to call the functions. Note that this is not safe against contracts 134 calling code within their constructors, but also doesn't really matter...

When deploying contracts in PermissionedNodeRegistry.deployWithdrawVault(), PermissionlessNodeRegistry.deployWithdrawVault(), an attacker can find out in advance the address of the future deployed contract and deploy his own at this address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The address of the new contract depends solely on the salt parameter, which is calculated from user-provided data. Once a user's create transaction is broadcast, the parameters for calculating salt can be viewed by anyone viewing the public mempool. This...

MISSING ACCESS CONTROL AND MISSING LOGICAL CHECKS IN PENALTY.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the penalty.sol contract anyone can call the markValidatorSettled... function to clear the penalty of an erring validator. Proof of Concept Anyone can clear the penalty of an erring validator without by calling markValidatorSettled... as the function...

selfdestruct(self) does not clear balance

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Balance is stored in OVMETH contract, function opSuicide increments it, then Sucide does not change it, at the end of function it will be decremented. Which means it will not be changed. Proof of Concept // SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-3.0 pragma solidit...

UNJUSTIFIED ZERO INDEX VALIDATION HINDERS INDEX VALUE OF 0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact SocializingPool.verifyProof currently incorporates a zero index check which blocks the entry of an index value of 0. While this check is designed to prevent the use of invalid index values, it inadvertently prohibits the valid index value of 0. This may...

The admin address used in initialize function, can behave maliciously

Lines of code Vulnerability details N.B : This bug is different that the other one titled "Risk of losing admin access if updateAdmin set with same current admin address". Both issues are related to access control, but the impact, root cause and bug fix are different, so DO NOT mark it as dupliat...

Recipient address is not appropriately validated or sanitized in the BaseFeeVault contract (loss of funds)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the recipient address is not properly validated, an attacker could supply a malicious address as the recipient. This could result in the accumulated fees being sent to an unintended or unauthorized party. It could lead to financial loss or disruption ...

Technically the seven days period is not guaranteed and it's possible for the challenger to delete a withdrawal even if it hasn't been challenged during the seven days

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept There's an existing logic to prevent the CHALLENGER from deleting a l2Output after the finalization period has ended. This is done to prevent having user withdrawals blocked after the finalization period has elapsed without challenges. The...

Attacker can steal CrossDomainMessenger and OptimismPortal token balances or tokens of anyone give approval for those contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contracts CrossDomainMessenger and OptimismPortal are part of the bridge protocol and they are responsible for sending messages between two network. they both call arbitrary address with arbitrary data that user specified and it would give attacker to...

The claim() function has a reentrancy vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The claim function has a reentrancy vulnerability . In the function, the UtilLib.sendValue function is called before emitting the Claimed event. This violates the "check-effect-interaction" model, which is a best practice for secure smart contract...

Anyone Can selfdestruct The VaultProxy Contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details -Since the initialise function is missing initializer modifier as it's inteded to be not protected as per ETHx smart contract functions documentation , And Since VaultFactory contract doesn't initialize the VaultProxy upon its initializati...

Unauthorized Access and Control in Proxy Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary: The code contains a bug that can lead to unauthorized access and control over the contract. This bug allows any caller, even those who are not the owner or address0, to bypass the intended access control mechanisms and execute arbitrary code on the...

The owner is a single point of failure and a centralization risk

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Having a single EOA as the only owner of contracts is a large centralization risk and a single point of failure. A single private key may be taken in a hack, or the sole holder of the key may become unable to retrieve the key when necessary. Similar...

Incorrect Handling of Return Value in onlyWhenNotPaused Modifier

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: contract named "L1ChugSplashProxy" which is a proxy contract with additional functionality for code and storage modification. However, there is a bug in the code that needs to be addressed. Bug: The bug is in the modifier onlyWhenNotPaused function...

accountsMap[ADMIN] not set in initialize function of StaderConfig contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When initializing the StaderConfig contract with the initialize function, the admin address is not set in accountsMapADMIN variable, so the getAdmin function will return address0. This will cause the loss of the ownership of the VaultProxy contract as it...