Precision Error in getPrice due to Omission of Last Day's Interest

Lines of code Vulnerability details The code attempts to calculate the price based on the interest from the previous day by using range.end - 1. However, if the last day represented by range.end has fully passed, the interest for this day is never taken into account. Over time, these slight...

In the event of a fall in the price of USDY, the withdrawal of funds for the user may be blocked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a wrap function called by users to wrap their USDY tokens . In the future, to withdraw tokens, the user calls the unwrap function . However, in the unwrap function, the user can have more funds in case the price of USDY falls. Based on the case...

Incorrect initialization of rUSDY.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rUSDY.sol contract inherits PausableUpgradeable contract but does not invoke its initialzers during its own initialization. Due to which the state of PausableUpgradeable contract remain uninitialized. File: contracts/usdy/rUSDY.sol contract rUSDY is...

Tokens transferred with bridge can get lost if destination transaction can’t be executed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User could lost his tokens, if tx on destination chain will failrevert. There is no option to recover the tokens on source chain. Revert could be cause by function attachThreshold. This function finds the correspondence between the amount and threshhold...

A malicious delegator could artificially inflate the deductions for a transcoder, potentially leading to incorrect vote counting.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept In the handleVoteOverrides function, the deductions are added to the transcoder's voter state without any validation: A malicious delegator could call countVote multiple times, each tim...

When user unbonds before transcoder calls reward, then cumulativeRewardFactor for the round is less than it should be

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When user unbonds before transcoder calls reward, then cumulativeRewardFactor for the round is less than it should be. As result other delegators loose rewards. Proof of Concept Each round transcoder can call reward function in order to claim reward toke...

Attacker can steal funding yield from the PerpetualAtlanticVaultLP contract atomically

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker is able to atomically steal large amounts of the funding yield from the PerpetualAtlanticVaultLP contract. This is due to the fact that the deposit function of the PerpetualAtlanticVaultLP contract will first issue the attacker shares based o...

Malicious users can manipulate the withdrawRound to withdraw their stake before the unbonding period is over.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Disruption the normal bonding incentives and mechanisms in the protocol. Validators or transcoders could withdrew unexpectedly, preventing governance responses to bonded token changes. Proof of Concept The withdrawStake function first checks if the...

missing in calculation parameter issue in Earnings Pool

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact here is the vulnerable part in code : function getLastTranscoderRewardsEarningsPooladdress transcoder, uint256 round internal view returns uint256 rewardRound, EarningsPool.Data memory pool BondingCheckpoint storage bond = getBondingCheckpointAttranscode...

Calling withdraw on a delegated amount of WETH doesn't subtract from totalWethDelegated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract's WETH amount gets permanently bricked. Proof of Concept A user can call addToDelegate and give WETH, that other people can use for bonding with their rDPX in exchange for a certain percentage appointed by the delegatee. Delegate memory...

Deployment issues with chains not compatible with Shanghai hardfork

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Besides issues with deployment &maintenance contracts; A Big Issues is quoted below from an audit finding... "This could also become a problem if different versions of Solidity are used to compile contracts for different chains. The differences in byteco...

The order of decreasing total stake for the old delegate and increasing for the new delegate could lead to issues if one reverts but not the other.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept The potential issue is: decreaseTotalStake succeeds in decreasing the old delegate's stake increaseTotalStake reverts and does not increase the new delegate's stake This would incorrect...

Zero Redemption Amount in RdpxDecayingBonds Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The redeem function, as described, checks whether the assets to be redeemed assets are not zero. This check is in place to ensure that a user isn't redeeming a non-zero amount of rdpxAmount tokens in exchange for zero assets. Such a check is essential to...

Overwriting rdpxAmount Without Checks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The decreaseAmount function, specifically the line bondsbondId.rdpxAmount = amount;. This vulnerability allows overwriting the rdpxAmount without any checks or backups, which can result in irreversible data loss. function decreaseAmount uint256 bondId,...

.The _newPosPrev/_newPosNext hints do not fully prevent invalid ordering when decreasing a delegate's stake.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract could incorrectly deactivate or reward transcoders based on the invalid pool order. Proof of Concept When decreasing a delegate's stake with decreaseTotalStake, the contract calls transcoderPool.updateKey to update the delegate's position in...

Array Mismatch in RdpxV2Core.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact reserveTokens and reserveAsset are not synced because reserveTokens was not initialized in the constructor. Proof of Concept The RdpxV2Core.sol contract stores the reserve token information and also uses another array to only track the reserve token...

Improper handling of cases when total supply = 0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Improper handling of cases when total supply = 0 AMM engine may not be started. Proof of Concept Considering if a vault uses Shell as its AMM engine. At the start, the vault has 0 X and Y balance and someone try to deposit tokens to it, this process will...

Lack of balance checks in the withdrawGivenOutputAmount function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of balance checks in the withdrawGivenOutputAmount function can lead to various unpredictable consequences due to the breach of requirements "The pool's balances of the x reserve and y reserve tokens must be greater than the MINBALANCE" and "The...

Lack of balance checks in the depositGivenInputAmount function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of balance checks in the depositGivenInputAmount function can lead to various unpredictable consequences due to the breach of requirement "The pool's ratio of y to x must be within the interval MINM, MAXM". Proof of Concept The depositGivenInputAmou...

Lack of Deadline Protection in Key Functions Poses Potential Exploits

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The absence of a deadline parameter in key function calls within the EvolvingProteus contract poses a significant vulnerability. Transactions that stay pending in the mempool due to outdated slippage could be executed at a much later time than initially...