Bidding data structure is corrupted, leading to unfair removal from queue.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description processBidsInQueue in GroupBuy handles integrating a new bid into the existing structure. If bumps out lower-paying bids until the new bid is completely fulfilled or the remaining bids are too high. When the lowest paying bid has higher quantity tha...

NOT refunding excess token while adding liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LP providers can lose fund Proof of Concept Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps incase of ether, return excess ether - incase of erc20, transfer only required amount - --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: 😕 1 Shun...

Attacker can make group pay for tokenID that is not intended.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description purchase in GroupBuy.sol executes the purchase call for the group. There are two possibilities for which tokenIDs can be bought in GroupBuy: 1. If the group is for a specific NFT, the tokenID is the value in pool.merkleRoot variable. 2. If the group...

MEV searchers can capture slippage tolerance on pool creation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the current Caviar protocol, anybody can supply initial liquidity to a newly created pool. An LP who intends to create a new pool and add liqiduity could execute the following transactions: 1. LP transaction 1: pair = Caviar.create 2. LP transaction 2...

LP's ERC20 tokens cannot be rescued when owner closes the pair

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LP cannot be rescued when owner closes the pair. Aside from the NFT which can be salvaged through Pair.withdraw, the ERC20 token amounts cannot be rescued, resulting in fund loss. Proof of Concept In case of any malicious attempt to grief the protocol, t...

Possible Reentrancy Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Add function, in case of non Eth Base Token, LP Tokens are minted for LP Provider before transferring the Base Token from Provider to Contract. In remove function, Fractional Tokens are Transferred to LP Provider before Burning the LP Token. In wrap...

Unlimited minting of fractional tokens by calling Pair.wrap() multiple times

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can mint an unlimited amount of fractional tokens and break the protocol by selling the tokens. Proof of Concept NFTs can be traded for 1e18 fractional tokens by calling the function wrap. Wrap calls validateTokenIdstokenIds, proofs which in turn ru...

Orders may not be fillable due to missing approvals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Not all IERC20 implementations revert when there's a failure in approve. If one of these tokens returns false, there is no check for whether this has happened during the order listing validation, so it will only be detected when the order is attempted. Impact I...

Surplus token after adding liquidity is not refunded to liquidity providers. LP might suffer front-running attack and lose funds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function Pair.add receives base token and fractional token from liquidity providers and mint equivalent amount of LP token for them. The amount of LP token be minted is calculate in function addQuote function addQuoteuint256 baseTokenAmount, uint256...

LP pricing formula is vulnerable to flash loan manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The LP pricing formula used in the buyQuote, sellQuote, addQuote, removeQuote functions of Pair.sol contract is vulnerable to flash loan manipulation. Proof of Concept The baseTokenReserves calculates the current balance of base token reserves. This...

buyQuote should be rounded up

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The buyQuote is not rounded up, which can cause a leak of value, due to the buyQuote being underestimated. Proof of Concept The function Pair.buyQuote does not round up, which can cause the issue described under Impact: function buyQuoteuint256...

User will often overpay when adding liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact One of the assets either baseTokens or fractionalTokens will likely be overpaid when the user calls Pair.add liquidity. Proof of Concept The Pair.add function takes baseTokenAmount, fractionalTokenAmount and minLpTokenAmount as inputs. The first two...

Funds will be lost if the contract handling the refunds are unable to handle them at the moment

Lines of code Vulnerability details The return values of low-level calls are not checked Impact If the fund transfer results in a revert on the recipient's end, e.g. due to being paused, the code will continue on as if it had been successful, and the Ether will be lost. Proof of Concept Return...

sellQuote might lead to unexpected reverts when returning zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the implementation of sellQuote follows the logic of getAmountOut from Uniswap V2 Library. However it doesn't add +1 as the original implementation, this could make the function return zero and lead to reverts. Proof of Concept Tools Used Manual review...

Protocol's fractional token assumes that each NFT in a collection has the same value

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can cheat the system by wrapping getting fractional tokens a low value NFT and unwrapping a high value NFT selling the same fractional tokens. Pair creator might lose out. Proof of Concept Pair.wrap takes in an array of tokenIds and an array of...

OptimisticListingSeaport: pendingBalances overwritten instead of increased

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The functions list and cash overwrite the current value instead of increasing it: pendingBalancesvaultactiveListing.proposer = activeListing.collateral; pendingBalancesvaultactiveListing.proposer = collateral; This can be very problematic because the val...

INITREFS() COULD BE USED TO OVERWRITE ALL REFFERAL DATA

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Although denoted as deprecated, initRefs is readily there in Referrals.sol that could be called by the owner whose private keys might have been compromised to reassign all the referral data. This could impact the referrers specifically who might have...

Wrong position size calculation in TradingLibrary.pnl()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users will pay less closing fees than they should when they have a profitable short position. Also, they will pay more fees when they have a lost short position. Proof of Concept TradingLibrary.pnl calculates the new position size like below. function...

Owners can delay the call to startDraw to reject the draw result

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owners can call lastResortTimelockOwnerClaimNFT to reclaim NFT back if settings.recoverTimelock block.timestamp // Stop the withdraw revert RECOVERYISNOTYETPOSSIBLE; ... If an owner delays the startDraw until settings.recoverTimelock, the owner can call...

After the redrawing the winner can lose his NFT for the Admin

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The owner can manipulate the raffle by deprivation of a specific address winner Proof of Concept Please copy the following POC on VRFNFTRandomDraw.t.sol function testadminRedrawingandReclaimnft public address winner = address0x1337; address winner2 =...