use higher version of openzeppelin library instead of vulnerible ones.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the Op lib has some dangerous vulnerabilities in lower versions especially when you work with ERC1155 Openzeppelin already says the lower versions are vulnerable. Affected versions = 4.2.0 Tools Used vs code Recommended Mitigation Steps upgrade versions ...

people can steal others voting power by creating mlicous proxy contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact bad actor can control over the other peoples voting power in delegate proxy contracts. lets start from delegateMulti when somebody calls it it leads to delegateMulti and it calls processDelegationsource, target, amount; in the process of loop. if you loo...

Hash Collisions and Front-Running Risk

Lines of code Vulnerability details Salt Value in Proxy Deployment: The contract uses a salt value of 0 during the deployment of proxy delegator contracts. This introduces a significant security concern related to potential hash collisions. If multiple delegators attempt to deploy to the same...

OpenZeppelin 's recent v5.0.0 release includes many changes to libraries/contracts that can directly affect ERC20MultiDelegate functionality

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact OpenZeppelin just released v5.0.0, and there happen to be several significant changes that directly affect the ERC20MultiDelegate implementation, directly and indirectly, via packages used and inherited from. Here’s a link to the release: Below is a...

Lack of access control in claimConcentratedRewards and claimAmbientRewards functions allows unauthorized fund drainage. Implement access restrictions.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any caller can call claimConcentratedRewards or claimAmbientRewards and drain funds. The contract should restrict calling these functions to authorized roles. Proof of Concept The lack of access control on claimConcentratedRewards and claimAmbientRewards...

Improper Encoding

firefox is vulnerable to Improper Encoding. The vulnerability exists due to improperly validating curl command which allows an attacker to cause unintended behavior in smart contracts that rely on the sender's accurate identification...

New Ward Can Revoke Admin Access

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A Newly added ward can remove all the wards from the system, including the admin one. Proof of Concept There is not a mechanism to prevent newly added wards from removing everyone else access' to the contracts, including the admin. Tools Used Manual...

Unsafe message encode and decode for cross chain message transfer and in execution process through axelar

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The cross chain message passing is done through the axelar gateway contracts. To pass the message, the message has to be formatted abi.encode and sent to destination chain from source chain. In destination chain, through gateway contract, the received...

CVE-2023-40625

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

CVE-2023-40625

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

Authorization

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

CVE-2023-40625 Missing Authorization check in SAP Manage Purchase Contracts App

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

CVE-2023-40625 Missing Authorization check in SAP Manage Purchase Contracts App

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

CVE-2023-40625

CVE-2023-40625 involves the SAP S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App where versions 102–107 do not perform necessary authorization checks for authenticated users, enabling potential privilege escalation. Connected source PT-2023-27547 corroborates the affected versions and notes remediation: upgr...

SAP S4CORE Security Vulnerability

SAP S4CORE is a Manage Purchase Contracts App from SAP, Germany. A security vulnerability exists in SAP S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, and 107, which originates from a failure to perform the required authorization checks on authenticated users, allowing an...

CVE-2023-40625: Missing Authorization

S4CORE Manage Purchase Contracts App - versions 102, 103, 104, 105, 106, 107, does not perform necessary authorization checks for an authenticated user. This could allow an attacker to perform unintended actions resulting in escalation of privileges which has low impact on confidentiality and...

Failure to Return Value from Low-Level Call

Lines of code Vulnerability details In Solidity, the "low-level call" operation, often used with inline assembly, is a powerful tool for interacting with external contracts. However, there is a specific bug related to low-level calls that can result in unexpected behavior. Instances 1: File:...

Cross-chain smart contract call can revert and burned tokens in source chain can't be recovered

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary AXELARGATEWAY.callContract doesn't revert on failure in destination chain , execute function can revert for varies reasons such as not passing require statements, or low gas so tokens remained burned in source chain and can't be recovered . Impact Loss ...

Token recipient is an inaccessible address for contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The msg.sender address from the SourceBridge.burnAndCallAxelar function is used by the DestinationBridge.mintIfThresholdMet function as the TOKEN recipient. However, the msg.sender address will not be controllable by contracts on L2, so any tokens will b...

Lack of Input Validation and Error Handling

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the slashTranscoder function, the parameters slashAmount and finderFee are directly used for computation without any validity checks. This design overlooks several key issues: There's no check to see if slashAmount or finderFee are within logical...