Upgradeability completely breaks decentralization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owner of SafEth can steal all staked funds. Proof of Concept SafEth is an upgradeable ERC20 contract that handles the conversion between ETH and whatever derivatives that are implemented. But it also has access to the staked funds through the derivatives...

Disabling self-transfer may cause integration issues with other protocols

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Integration errors with other protocols Proof of Concept The changes made for H-01 causes transfers to revert if from == to. This is problematic because this is non-standard ERC20 behavior that can cause integration risk/issues with other protocols. I...

Current transfer implementations can lead to loss of user founds if LP is updated or wrongly set

Lines of code Vulnerability details Current transfer implementations can lead to loss of user founds if LP is updated or wrongly set The current implementation of assetTransfer and assetTransferFrom don't check if the asset is a contract and don't check if the transfer returns a false instead of...

Incorrect validation of the result of the transfer * transferFrom method call. Failure to comply with the ERC20 standard

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Inability to use ERC20 standard tokens. As an example of the future LP token Proof of Concept According to the ERC-20 standard, the transfer and transferFrom methods return true or false, but looking at the code we see that:...

ZERO TRUNCATION COULD LEAD TO UNEXPECTED RESULTS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Precision issue leading to zero truncation due to numerator smaller than denominator in a ratio or a division happens readily in Solidity if extra cares have not been given to it. Arithmetic operations running into this incident are typically associated...

Incorect handling of decimals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorect calculations in case token will have a different number of decimals Proof of Concept Both the earned and the rewardPerToken functions are calculation the decimals based on the hardcoded assumption that the token will have 1e18 decimals, however...

Rewards for the Staking.sol contract may be stolen via the first staker

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The return amount of the function rewardPerToken may be inflated for the first in the Staking.sol contract. Proof of Concept The Staking.sol contract is designed for the LOT token holders to be able to stake their native tokens. Thus, the token holders...

Incorrect usage of safeTransferFrom() function . This permanently traps ticketPrice in sender address (msg.sender )

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Because the callermsg.sender never gives approval for ERC20 transfers, calls to safeTransferFrom on the contract will revert with insufficient approval. This will trap from caller and unable to transfer ticketPrice to Lottery contract address. The root...

In the beginning its relatively easy to gain majority share

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As mentioned in the document, Although possible, the permissions to execute arbitrary actions or upgrade the DAO should not be given to EOAs as this poses a security risk to the organization if the account is compromised or acts adversarial. Instead, the...

ERC20 approve can fail for some tokens

Lines of code ReaperBaseStrategyv4.solL74 Vulnerability details Summary Some tokens like USDT do not work when changing the allowance from an existing non-zero allowance value. They must first be approved by zero and then the actual allowance must be approved. approve reverts for tokens like USDT...

Ethos stil using LUSD (not ERN) will lead to confusion and ambiguity of the protocol resulting uncountable risk for the project

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Ethos stil using LUSD not ERN will lead to confusion and ambiguity of the protocol resulting uncountable risk for the project Proof of Concept Ethos is a fork project of Liquity with additional changes, supporting multi collateral tokens. There are some...

pullCollateralFromBorrowerOperationsOrDefaultPool can fail on if _amount will set to zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Amount can be zero,as there is not no check in place, while collect modules do attempt to send it in such a case anyway. Some ERC20 tokens do not allow zero value transfers, reverting such attempts. As a result, a combination of a token set as a collect...

Callback tokens can cause re-entrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There are many places in the code where token transfers are in the middle of a function more specifically, both after and before state changes. It is very important not to pass control to untrusted code in these calls, as they could potentially...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #460 [1677510923458]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 460 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The safeTransferFrom function on the ClearingHouse is normally used when an OpenSea auction successfully ends and the required ERC20/WETH have been transferred to the...

reentrancy in MultiRewardStaking::claimRewards for tokens with transfer callbacks, like erc777

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can drain all the tokens from MultiRewardStaking Proof of Concept In claimtRewards important state changes are done after interactions with tokens: File: MultiRewardStaking.sol function claimRewardsaddress user, IERC20 memory rewardTokens...

Use safeTransferFrom and safeApprove foe the reward tokens in Vault Controller instead of transferFrom and approve functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In 3 functions return values of ERC20 contracts either approve or transferFrom are not checked : fundStakingRewards ; addStakingRewardsTokens and handleInitialDeposit. This is especially dangerous in the addStakingRewardsTokens function, because in this...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #664 [1675726078144]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 664 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1 ERC20 Quest: withdrawFee function should only be able to be called once instead of multiple times Issue: The withdrawFee function can be called multiple times by admin after a quest ends, resulting in more than t...

Some ERC20 tokens deduct a fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 token implementations have a fee that is charged on each token transfer. This means that the transferred amount isn't exactly what the receiver will get. A call to ERC20token.transferrecipient, 100 with a fee-on-transfer of 5% will entitle the...

_transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens Summary Setting directly typeuint256.max won't work for USDTTether. This is done at both transferFromCaller: NFTDriver.solL289 AddressDriver.solL174 Description Some tokens like USDT do not work...

ERC20 TRANSFER AND TRANSFERFROM ARE NOT CHECKING FOR THE ZERO ADDRESS OF to AND from, DURING EXECUTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 standard tokens check for the != address0 condition in the transfer and transferFrom functions for the to address and from address in order to make sure funds are not transfered to zero address and balance is not updated in the balanceOf mapping fo...