Fee amount too restrictive

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the fee collect modules like FeeCollectModule, the initializePublicationCollectModule checks if the fee amount that each user needs to pay is at least = BPSMAX = 10000. For certain currencies with fewer decimals this is too restrictive. As an example,...

Users’ staking rewards can get redeemed by other users

Lines of code Vulnerability details Can be medium or high: When a user deposits through ConvexStakingWrapper, the contract calls the MasterChef's deposit function and deposits to it with recipient = msg.sender, but the MasterChef actually updates the deposited amount of the ConvexStakingWrapper...

wrong minting amount

Handle danb Vulnerability details uint256 proxy = baseBalance ONE / redeemRate; should be: uint256 proxy = amount ONE / redeemRate; --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

UniV2ClassDex.sol#uniClassSell() Tokens with fee on transfer are not fully supported

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details function uniClassSellDexInfo memory dexInfo, address buyToken, address sellToken, uint sellAmount, uint minBuyAmount, address payer, address payee internal returns uint buyAmount address pair = getUniClassPairbuyToken, sellToken, dexInfo.factory;...

pimcore code issue vulnerability (CNVD-2022-07499)

Pimcore is a set of open source Web content management platform for creating and managing Web applications from Austrian company Pimcore. The platform integrates Web content management, e-commerce frameworks and product information management applications.Pimcore has a code issue vulnerability in...

GHSA-8QVX-F5GF-G43V Logic error in dolibarr

The application does not check the input of price number lead to Business Logic error through negative price amount...

Missing slippage/min-return check in the curve Pool

Handle defsec Vulnerability details Impact Trades can happen at a bad price and lead to receiving fewer tokens than at a fair market price. The attacker's profit is the protocol's loss. Proof of Concept The NonUSTStrategy contract is missing slippage checks which can lead to being vulnerable to...

TimeswapPair.sol#borrow() Improper implementation allows attacker to increase pool.state.z to a large value

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details In the current implementation, borrow takes a user input value of zIncrease, while the actual collateral asset transferred in is calculated at L319, the state of pool.state.z still increased by the value of the user's input at L332. Even though a large number...

Dashboard is not working , lend positiona are still loading, the same is for Lend button, Lend Amount to lend is not refresjing

Handle 0v3rf10w Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the concept. Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps --- The...

CVE-2021-45910

An issue was discovered in gif2apng 1.9. There is a heap-based buffer overflow within the main function. It allows an attacker to write data outside of the allocated buffer. The attacker has control over a part of the address that data is written to, control over the written data, and to some...

VaderReserve.reimburseImpermanentLoss improperly converts USDV to VADER

Handle TomFrenchBlockchain Vulnerability details Impact IL isn't properly converted from being in terms of USDV to VADER, resulting in reserve paying out incorrect amount. Proof of Concept VaderReserve.reimburseImpermanentLoss receives an amount in terms of USDV and converts this to an amount of...

xToken Approvals Allow Spenders To Spend More Tokens

Handle leastwood Vulnerability details Impact The approve function has not been overridden and therefore uses xToken shares instead of the equivalent rebalanced amount, i.e. the underlying vault token amount. Proof of Concept The approved spender may spend more tokens than desired. In fact, the...

YetiForceCRM is vulnerable to Business Logic Errors because product amount can be a negative number

YetiForceCRM is vulnerable to Business Logic Errors because product amount can be a negative number...

GHSA-7V7W-F7C6-F829 YetiForceCRM is vulnerable to Business Logic Errors because product amount can be a negative number

YetiForceCRM is vulnerable to Business Logic Errors because product amount can be a negative number...

SavingsAccount withdrawAll and switchStrategy can freeze user funds by ignoring possible strategy liquidity issues

Handle hyh Vulnerability details Impact Full withdrawal and moving funds between strategies can lead to wrong accounting if the corresponding market has tight liquidity, which can be the case at least for AaveYield. That is, as the whole amount is required to be moved at once from Aave, both...

If a promoter cancels a promotion, unclaimed rewards of ticket holders are lost

Handle hubble Vulnerability details Impact Loss of rewards for the ticket holders who have not yet claimed the rewards accrued until the previous epocs, if the promoter cancels the promotion after any epoch. Proof of Concept contract : TwabRewards function : cancelPromotion line 132 delete...

Business Logic Errors in pimcore/pimcore

Description The application is vulnerable to Business Logic error through negative cart amount. Proof of Concept Step 1: Login to the application https://10.x-dev.pimcore.fun/admin/login?perspective= Step 2: Navigate to Online shop - Pricing Rules - Voucher Discount - Actions Step 3: Enter Negati...

Wrong emergencyWithdraw logic

Handle 0x1f8b Vulnerability details Impact The contract doesn't work as expected. Proof of Concept The method, emergencyWithdraw inside the contract yield/NoYield doesn't work as expected, the transfer was done with received value, and it should be done with amount, so the emergencyWithdraw never...

The vulnerability of MasterCard Tokenisation Service (MDES) and Visa Tokenisation Service (VTS) lies in the possibility of arbitrary modification of the “Amount” field in the Authorization Request ISO 8583 packet. This allows attackers to use cryptographic algorithms to carry out fraudulent transactions.

The vulnerability of MasterCard Tokenisation Service MDES and Visa Tokenisation Service VTS lies in the possibility of arbitrary modification of the “Amount” field in the Authorisation Request ISO 8583 packet. Exploiting this vulnerability could allow attackers to use cryptographic keys to carry...

The vulnerability of MasterCard Tokenisation Service (MDES) and Visa Tokenisation Service (VTS) lies in the absence of critical fields in the ARQC cryptographic algorithm (such as 9F15 MCC), which allows a malicious actor to disclose protected information.

The vulnerability of MasterCard Tokenisation Service MDES and Visa Tokenisation Service VTS lies in the possibility of arbitrary modification of the “Amount” field in the Authorisation Request ISO 8583 packet. Exploiting this vulnerability could allow a malicious actor to disclose protected...