6494 matches found
Pulling user's ERC20 tokens to Contract LooksRareAggregator requires approvals from the user
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract ERC20EnabledLooksRareAggregator pulls user's ERC20 tokens to Contract LooksRareAggregator without pre-approvals from the user. This will prohibit the token transfer unless somewhere else the approvals have been done e.g. before calling the...
Unsafe ERC20 operations due to lack of contract length check
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Functions executeERC20DirectTransfer and executeERC20TransferFrom replicates solmate libraries methods. The problem with this is that these functions does not check existence of code at the token address. If executeERC20DirectTransferand...
OwnableTwoStep delay not set
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract TokenRescuer inherits the contract OwnableTwoSteps but does not set any delay. There should be a constructor in TokenRescuer responsible for setting the delay as described in the comments of the OwnableTwoSteps contract. Without any delay,...
Upgraded Q -> M from #43 [1668210521611]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 43 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Q-02 - Huge trust assumption in recoverErc20 Reward tokens are transferred into this contract when a pledge is created. The comment notes " Recovers ERC2O tokens sent by mistake to the contract", but this function can...
Borrower can put their address when submiting addCredit() which can make the lender not be able to withdraw tokens
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact when calling addCredit by borrower, they can choose to put in their address as the lender instead of the actuall lender. this can bring problems later on when the lender is trying to withdraw funds from the contract. they wont be able to withdraw the fun...
Line of credit status can be set to REPAID even if having credits with debt
Lines of code Vulnerability details A malicious borrower can close non-existing credits to alter the status of the credit to LineLib.STATUS.REPAID, even if having open credit with debt. Impact The close function in the LineOfCredit contract can be used to close non-existing credits, which will...
Potential DoS when closing a credit nominated in ETH in the LineOfCredit contract
Lines of code Vulnerability details When closing a credit that was issued in ETH, the LineOfCredit contract will send the lender his deposit and any accrued interests using the address.transferamount function, which may fail and revert the whole function, leading to an eventual DoS. Impact The...
LineLib.receiveTokenOrETH() can accept more ETH than it accounts for
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LineLib.receiveTokenOrETH can receive ETH and accounts for an amount to receive but it is possible to send more ETH than amount, meaning that any extra ETH sent will be lost to the contract. Proof of Concept LineLib.receiveTokenOrETH is as follows...
useAndRepay function can be used to underflow the principal debt of a credit
Lines of code Vulnerability details The function useAndRepay present in the SpigotedLine contract doesn't check that the amount is within the debt limit and can be used by a malicious lender to underflow the principal variable and manipulate the debt of a credit. Impact A malicious lender can use...
Functions addCredit(...) and increaseCredit(...) can lock lender’s ETH forever
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In LineOfCredit contract, both functions addCredit... and increaseCredit... require mutual consent between lender and borrower. If lender is tricked by borrower, or by mistake, lender ETH will be locked in the contract forever. function addCredit uint128...
revenueContract that uses AccessControl instead of Ownable can’t work with SpigotLib's removeSpigot()
Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The code in removeSpigot is the following bool success, = revenueContract.call abi.encodeWithSelector self.settingsrevenueContract.transferOwnerFunction, self.operator // assume function only takes one param that is new owner address ; So...
LineLib.sendOutTokenOrETH() may not be compatible with contract receiver because of use of transfer()
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LineLib.sendOutTokenOrETH may revert when its receiver is a contract, preventing it from receiving ETH, and thus from much of the functionality of the protocol. Proof of Concept LineLib.sendOutTokenOrETH is as follows. / @notice - Send ETH or ERC20 token...
Arbitrary call order to handle mutual consent can lead to unrecoverable native ETH
Lines of code Vulnerability details Creating new credits and increasing the credit deposit requires both parties, the lender and the borrower, to agree. This is implemented by having both call the same function with the same call data. However, as it's possible to use native ETH as a credit token...
call() should be used instead of transfer() on address payable
Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address will inevitably make the transaction fail when: 1. The claimer smart contract does not implement a payable function. 2. The claimer smart contract does implement a payable fallback whic...
Mssing Crucial Checks When Unlocking funds for Withdraw Requests from L2
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Atomicity literally does not exist when users from L2 initiate a withdrawal by burning funds on the contract and sending the message to L1. This is giving malicious attackers plenty of time to stealthily launch a series of small and yet sizable forgery o...
Funds can be stolen
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For L2, any deposit finalization should come from L1 bridge address. Now the MailBox contract is currently helping to simulate such calls to be coming from L1. The problem is if within zkSync ecosystem, a contract is deployed with address same as L1 brid...
Malicious seller can finalize his/her auction without changing data.lowestQuote , then auction's state will not be updated to States.finalized and this seller can repeat finalize or cancel auction to steal tokens from contract
Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerable details In contract, an auction's state will beStates.Finalized if data.lowestQuote of this auction is different from typeuint128.max. L33-34 data.lowestQuote is assigned to equal clearingQuote when seller finalize auction. L238 This value will be...
Malicious seller can steal from bidders.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A seller can cancel the auction after finalize and thus can steal money from the bidders and get their original baseToken back. POC When an auction is started the value of a.data.lowestQuote is set as typeuint128.max here . In the atState function this...
Attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract buy creating fake auction and manipulating some contract logic. POC Assuming that the SizeSealed.sol initially contains 10000 DAI tokens, I’ll demonstrate how an attacker can steal these tokens. The bug i...
Any use of fee-on-transfer tokens as quote tokens in auctions will result in freeze or loss of funds for users.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Description SIZE auctions do not support fee-on-transfer tokens. The platform rejects taxed baseToken during createAuction: // Passes https://github.com/transmissions11/solmate/blob/main/src/utils/SafeTransferLib.solL9 // Transfer base tokens to auction contrac...