Users can lose funds if they call buy with _amount larger than type(uint48).max.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function buy take amount of type uint256 as input. amount is used to check if msg.value is correct depending on the sale price as follows: requireamount sale.price == msg.value, "WRONG PRICE"; but is not casted to uint48 as done to calculate the newI...

Potential security issues in CallLib solidity library

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: The CallLib solidity library contains several potential security issues that could be exploited by attackers. Issue 1: The executeCalls function does not check if the sender parameter is the contract owner before allowing the calls to be executed...

Upgraded Q -> M from #307 [1669043813221]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 307 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1. Wrong comparison sign Description The function swapAVAXForExactTokens will revert when msg.value amountsIn0 because amountsIn0 - msg.value will always cause underflow. Solidity version ^0.8.0 is used, so it will...

Users of StakingFundsVault can never redeem their LP token once staking has started

Lines of code Vulnerability details The burnLPToken of a Fees & MEV vault allow users to burn LP tokens in exchange of ETH. Quoting the documentation Every user has a right to leave the LSD network at anytime. A depositor/staker can simply sell their LP tokens to someone else or burn to redeem ET...

Initialization function can be front-run

Lines of code Vulnerability details Detailed description of the impact of this finding: Exchange.sol has initialization function that can be front-run, allowing an attacker to incorrectly initialize the contract. Due to the use of the delegatecall proxy pattern, Exchange.sol cannot be initialized...

Unsafe cast blocks withdraw of tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Unsafe cast blocks withdraw of tokens Impact tokensAvailableAtTime is a internal function used by tokensAvailableForWithdrawal and this one being used internally also externally as it is public by withdraw method. cliffAmount is a uint256, being able to have mu...

Divide before multiply

Lines of code Vulnerability details division before multiply Impact Solidity integer division might truncate. As a result, performing multiplication before division can sometimes avoid loss of precision. Proof of Concept In general, this is a problem due to precision. In this case, it also affect...

# Divide before multiply affects precision

Lines of code Vulnerability details Divide before multiply affects precision Impact Solidity integer division might truncate. As a result, performing multiplication before division can sometimes avoid loss of precision. Details In general, this is a problem due to precision. In this case, it also...

Upgraded Q -> H from 744 [1666621202565]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 744 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: 1. writeCheckpoint will fail to insert an initial checkpoint Due to solidity 0.8 overflow/underflow protection, accessing checkpointstoTokenIdnCheckpoints - 1 will throw if nCheckpoints == 0. As it is not possible...

FAILED TRANSFER WITH LOW LEVEL CALL COULD BE OVERLOOKED

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is possibility that failed transfer with low level call could be overlooked Proof of Concept Based on this Solidity official documentation Solidity The low-level functions call, delegatecall and staticcall return true as their first return value if...

Unsafe downcast operations can lead to silent failures

Lines of code Vulnerability details Solidity won't perform automatic checks when downcasting and it's possible for some fields to overflow while adding tiers. Proof of Concept Assume that in JBTiered721DelegateStore.recordAddTiers, one item for tiersToAdd contains votingUnits bigger than the size...

Upgraded Q -> M from 400 [1666366548697]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 400 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Use address.call instead of payable.transfer Avoid use of transfer to send ether since transfer sends a fixed amount of gas and future gas cost change may cause revert, The receiving contract will also revert if...

Upgraded Q -> M from 266 [1666361934775]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 266 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Stop Using Transfer Use call instead of transfer, as per. This does not introduce any issues for re-entrancy as all calling functions are marked non-reentrant. --- The text was updated successfully, but these...

Upgraded G -> M from 553 [1666369528441]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 553 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: 01 - payEther use transfer instead of call Replace line 154 for payablepayAddress.callvalue: payAmt"" Reason --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Lack of sanity check for initialQuantity and remainingQuantity when new tiers are being added can lead to underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Underflow can happen in recordMint and recordBestMintAvailableTier as unchecked is used. This causes a wrong value of tokenId to be returned. Proof of Concept In recordAddTiers, it checks for many params of JB721TierParams, including...

After proposed 0.8.0 upgrade kicks in, L2 finalizeInboundTransfer might not work.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description L2GraphTokenGateway uses the onlyL1Counterpart modifier to make sure finalizeInboundTransfer is only called from L1GraphTokenGateway. Its implementation is: modifier onlyL1Counterpart require msg.sender ==...

USE OF SOLIDITY VERSION 0.8.14 WHICH HAS KNOWN ISSUES APPLICABLE TO Blur Exchange

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Vulnerability related to ‘Optimizer Bug Regarding Memory Side Effects of Inline Assembly’ ref : Blur Exchange inherits solidity contracts from openzeppelin and these uses inline assembly, and optimization is enabled while compiling...

A cancelled order can be executed again by the order creator.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A cancelled order can be executed again by the order creator. While validating the signature, it doesn't check any conditions when order.order.trader == msg.sender here so the already cancelled/filled orders can be executed again when the caller increase...

Incorrect implementation of the MerkleVerifier.sol library

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The MerkleVerifier results in an incorrect verification of the Merkle Tree. Description Using a simple test case from and deploying the contracts with MerkleVerifier.sol. We can see that the results differs when attempting to verify the Merkle Tree. Test...

AlgebraPoolDeployer.sol#L50-L51 : After the pool deployment, the memory of "parameters's" members are not cleaned.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As the memory of previous members are not cleared, this can cause unexpected result when deploying subsequent pools. Proof of Concept. parameters = ParametersdataStorage: dataStorage, factory: factory, token0: token0, token1: token1; pool = addressnew...