Upgraded Q -> 2 from #670 [1675726386915]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 670 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-03 DoS if address owns too many receipts With time it is viable for users to acquire thousands and tens of thousands of receipts. This may happen as a result of buying receipts for example, which was highlighted as...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #329 [1675575934658]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 329 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Reentrancy issue on claim for Erc1155Quest There is a reentrancy issue when claiming ERC1155 tokens, that will you reenter before redeemedTokens is updated. Here is the callback Quest.solL114 Stick to the check effec...

Quest owner can withdraw the reward for unclaimed receipt.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Erc1155Quest.withdrawRemainingTokens will withdraw all tokens even if there are users who minted a receipt but didn't claimed their rewards before endTime Proof of Concept Whitelisted account creates a new ERC1155 quest. Whitelisted account becames the...

ONLYMINTER MODIFIER WILL NOT REVERT WHEN MSG.SENDER IS NOT MINTERADDRESS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact onlyMinter in RabbitHoleReceipt.sol and RabbitHoleTickets.sol is noted to be housing only msg.sender == minterAddress in its code logic. RabbitHoleReceipt.solL58-L61 RabbitHoleTickets.solL47-L50 modifier onlyMinter msg.sender == minterAddress; ; It will...

All Transfer Hooks have incomplete checks which might lead to transactions reverting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to not checking that the ids array and amounts array are same , if given the two arraya of non-equal length it might lead to incorrect token transfers and unwanted transaction reverts. Proof of Concept According to the EIP specification the ids array...

_currentIndex is incorrectly updated; breaking the ERC1155 enumerable implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When minting and burning tokens,the ERC1155Enumerable implementation does not correctly update the following states: uint256 private allTokens; mappinguint256 = uint256 private allTokensIndex; mappingaddress = uint256 internal currentIndex; In particular...

Incorrect totalSupply() function design

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In ERC1155Enumerable.solL36-L37 line, totalsuppyl of ERC1155 is calculated packages/v2-token/src/base/ERC1155Enumerable.sol: 34 35: /// @inheritdoc IERC1155Enumerable 36: function totalSupply public view override returns uint256 37: return...

TOKEN CAN BE LOCKED WHEN THE _mint function is called to mint token to a contract that does not support the ERC1155

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Use safeMint intead of mint. The mint function of the TimeswapV2Token.solL110 calls the mint function of the ERC1155. If the token receiver is a contract that does not support ERC1155, the token is locked. Proof of Concept see: If the recipient contract...

Incorrect totalSupply() function design

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In ERC1155Enumerable.solL36-L37 line, totalsuppyl of ERC1155 is calculated packages/v2-token/src/base/ERC1155Enumerable.sol: 34 35: /// @inheritdoc IERC1155Enumerable 36: function totalSupply public view override returns uint256 37: return...

Lack of Input Validation in the Conduit Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description: The Conduit contract is a smart contract that serves as an originator for proxied transfers of ERC20, ERC721, and ERC1155 tokens. The contract's execute function takes an input of type ConduitTransfer calldata transfers which is an array of...

Exploring the Vulnerabilities of Seaport: A Technical Analysis of a Fake Signature Attack on Non-Fungible Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This finding aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the sc4m trend, which emerged in August 2022, and has since been a prevalent issue in the WEB3 space. Despite efforts to combat this phenomenon, bad actors continue to engage in illicit activities,...

Unhandled Revert in _performERC721Transfer Function Resulting in Loss of Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The performERC1155BatchTransfers function could lead to a loss of tokens if the safeBatchTransferFrom function reverts and the code does not properly handle the revert. This can be exploited by an attacker who can call the performERC1155BatchTransfers...

ConduitController: Smart Contract Initial Owner Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description The createConduit function in the ConduitController smart contract is responsible for deploying new conduits, or contracts that allow registered callers or open "channels" to transfer approved ERC20/721/1155 tokens on their behalf. The function...

_payoutEth() gas computation can make call revert even if balance is sufficient

Lines of code Vulnerability details Payout recipients can call getEthPayout to transfer the ETH balance of the contract to all payout recipients. This function makes an internal call to payoutEth, which computes the gasCost, then proceeds to check balance - gasCost 10000 before sending the result...

Reentrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Reentrancy in BlurExchange.executeInput,Input contracts/BlurExchange.sol128-175: External calls: - executeFundsTransfersell.order.trader,buy.order.trader,sell.order.paymentToken,sell.order.fees,price contracts/BlurExchange.sol147-153 -...

Possible loss of assets for seller through cross-contract re-entrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact BlurExchange.execute applies a reentrancyGuard modifier, however does not apply the Check-Effect-Interact pattern since cancelledOrFilledsellHash and cancelledOrFilledbuyHash are set to true after the transfers. This presents the risk of a cross-contract...

Wrong amount of ERC1155 token result in loss of funds for buyer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In StandardPolicyERC1155 contract, the amount of ERC1155 token always return 1 instead of amount value in Order struct. The result is when ERC1155 orders is matched, buyers will only receive 1 token even they specify amount 1, which means loss of funds f...

Orders of ERC1155 tokens with different amounts can be matched

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Both StandardPolicyERC1155.canMatchMakerBid and StandardPolicyERC1155.canMatchMakerBid return a boolean that ensure the orders parameters match. This boolean is then checked in BlurExchange.canMatchOrders. The problem is that this boolean does not take...

ERC1155's Amount Parameter Manipulation To Steal Buyers' Funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details We discovered that a rogue seller i.e., attacker can place an order for selling N amount where N 1 of a specific token id of an ERC-1155 NFT collection. However, when the sell order is fulfilled by a buyer, the attacker would spend only 1...

StandardPolicyERC1155.sol doesn't validate the order.amount properly.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact StandardPolicyERC1155.sol doesn't validate the order.amount properly. This contract is used to check a policy for matching orders of ERC1155 tokens. But it doesn't check the amount of ERC1155 token properly and traders might lose their funds unexpectedly...