fees model is counter-productive

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fees become more and more expensive as there are more buys in the share. Fees are collected when a user buy/sell/mint/burn. As the protocol or the share creator, you would want to earn more rewards which is done if a lot of users are buying in or if a lo...

Fee for minting the Market Nft token can be manipulated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fee of minting the Market's NFT is calculated based on total share count tokenCount. Such approach opens a way to collect big fees for fee recipients by deliberately stacking share tokens. address bondingCurve = shareDataid.bondingCurve; uint256...

improper validations result in loss of funds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact due the improper validation on amount , the users can pass Amount as 0 the calculated fee will be 0 and safeTranferFrom will pass. function getNFTMintingPriceuint256 id, uint256 amount public view returns uint256 fee address bondingCurve =...

Reentrancy leads to minting/burning/buying without paying the correct amount of fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fee calculations depends on shareDataid.tokenCount, which is updated AFTER doing the transfer of token. That means, if the token is an ERC777 compatible token, users can reenter the function paying, for example, less fees on a buy operation. Proof of...

Sanctionned funds keep earning APR, and protocol earning fees on these funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a user is sanctioned, if he has a scaledBalance not in the withdrawal queue, calling the nukeFromOrbit function will send sanctioned funds to an escrow contract, and these funds will keep earning APR. This is because when a deposit is executed, the...

Front-Running during Proxy Creation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An ill-intentioned party might front run every proxy contracts creation and deploy one first causing the transaction for every user to revert. It is worth noting that for this attack to succeed, the attacker would need to get their transaction mined in t...

CVE-2015-6964

MultiBit HD before 0.1.2 allows attackers to conduct bit-flipping attacks that insert unspendable Bitcoin addresses into the list that MultiBit uses to send fees to the developers. Attackers cannot realistically steal these fees for themselves. This occurs because there is no message authenticati...

CVE-2015-6964

MultiBit HD before 0.1.2 allows attackers to conduct bit-flipping attacks that insert unspendable Bitcoin addresses into the list that MultiBit uses to send fees to the developers. Attackers cannot realistically steal these fees for themselves. This occurs because there is no message authenticati...

UniswapV3 trading fees are always locked in treasury instead of going back to the protocol users through GeVault

Lines of code Vulnerability details TokenisableRange was redesigned to redirect collected fees to a pre-defined GeVault, where the protocol stakers can benefit from the added value. However, the use of an incorrect variable makes this distribution of the fees impossible to happen, and the fees wi...

New from fees rework: fees can still be stolen with a flash-loan on GeVault

Lines of code Vulnerability details The TokenisableRange fees have been reworked to be sent to the corresponding GeVault instance This fixed the problems with fee accounting in TokenisableRange but created a new, similar one in GeVault, where the deposit function does not count the fees in the...

The bond manager contract does not properly zero out the transcoder's cumulative rewards/fees between rounds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact transcoder's cumulative rewards and fees can continue accumulating from previous rounds, instead of resetting each round. This means a transcoder could claim portion of rewards/fees that it should not be entitled to. Proof of Concept This only resets the...

Potential Over-redemption Vulnerability in redeem Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the redeem function, when a third party is using their allowance to redeem shares on behalf of an owner, there exists a potential scenario where the third party could redeem more than originally intended by the owner. Proof of Concept This is how the...

Accounting for Fixed_Fee and Base_Fee twice leading to less amount or token recieved

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are multiple instances where fees is deducted twice. I will explain this with one function similar logic follows in other functions as well.So whenever the swapGivenInputAmount function is called by the user with inputAmount provided by the user th...

H-09 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Issue not mitigated About the problem In the report i have described some vaults that will not work in the designed system. Example of such vault will be any vault that has withdraw limit. In this case yieldVault.maxWithdraw call will not return actual amount o...

Auctions run at significantly different speeds for different prize tiers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Comments The V5 implementation delegates the task of claiming prizes to a network of claimers. The fees received by a claimer are calculated based on a dutch auction and limited based on the prize size of the highest tier the smallest prize. As a result, it is...

TokenisableRange.sol claimFee function allows more slippage than intended due to incorrect calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In TokenisableRange.sol, claimFee collects swap fees generated in uniswap and compound these fees by minting to Uniswap pool. During minting collected fees back in uniswap, slippage protection is conducted by comparing addedValue - a value based on added...

The treasury address can be updated by the contract owner to point to a malicious address after deployment

Lines of code ttps://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/71c0c0eca8af957202ccdbf5ce2f2a514ffe2e24/contracts/GeVault.solL58 Vulnerability details Impact Any fees or funds sent to the treasury could potentially be stolen or manipulated Proof of Concept The treasury address can be updated b...

Functions Not Considering ERC20 Transaction Fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens charge a transaction fee for every transfer used to encourage staking, add to liquidity pool, pay a fee to contract owner, etc.. Sometimes this is not a problem but in the cases where the same value is passed to a state variable and to...

Lack of slippage checks on public withdraw fees function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact function withdrawAllMarketFees IMarket calldata markets, ISwapper calldata swappers, IPenrose.SwapData calldata swapData public notPaused require markets.length == swappers.length && swappers.length == swapData.length, "Penrose: length mismatch" ;...

BigBang liquidations causes YieldBox-tokens to be locked in contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a position gets liquidated in BigBang the contract will receive YieldBox-assetId-tokens of which some are sent to the liquidator and penrose-fee-receiver. The rest will get stuck in the contract and cannot be claimed as fees in refreshPenroseFees...