Use safetransfer/safetransferFrom consistently instead of transfer/transferFrom

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Its a good to add require statement to checks the return value of token transfer or using safetransfer or safetransferFrom on Openzeppelin to ensure the token revert when transfer failure. Failure to do so will cause silent failures of transfer and affec...

MetaMask: Bypass parsing of transaction data, users on the phishing site will transfer/approve ERC20 tokens without being alerted

Vulnerability description not provided...

lack of validating transferFrom of token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As we have not defined the token implementation, it should be validated that token.transferFromfrom, addressthis, amount; return true. This is important, since the transaction could not be carried out and the function executed as correct. In the comments...

lack of validating transfer of tokens entered by the user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As we have not defined the implementation of note, it should be validated that note.transferrecipient, amount returns true. This is important, since the transaction could not be carried out and the function executed as correct. In the comments of the cod...

Transfer the original underlying token back to the user but actually transfer from lender to redeemer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Transfer the original underlying token back to the user but actually transfer from lender to redeemer. Underlying token may be locked forever and user may not receive their fund after redeeming. Proof of Concept // Transfer the original underlying token...

Principal token is not transferred

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When redeeming from APWine and Tempus here, the principal token is not transferred to the redeemer, so may be stuck on the lender contract. Proof of Concept Instead of Safe.transferFromIERC20u, lender, addressthis, amount; it should be...

Fees should be paid by the user when lend() to Swivel

Lines of code Vulnerability details function lend uint8 p, address u, uint256 m, uint256 memory a, address y, Swivel.Order calldata o, Swivel.Components calldata s public unpausedp returns uint256 // lent represents the number of underlying tokens lent uint256 lent; // returned represents the...

Transfer the principal token from the lender contract to here but actually transfer underlying token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Transfer the principal token from the lender contract to here but actually transfer underlying token from lender to redeemer. Proof of Concept // Transfer the principal token from the lender contract to here Safe.transferFromIERC20u, lender, addressthis,...

Reward token (auraBal) can be locked in the strategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. getRewardaddress account function of Aura Locker is an external function therefore can be called by anyone by passing in the address of strategy and transferring the rewards to the strategy. harvest...

attacker can lock all the auraBAL rewards in contract address forever and they won't be accessible

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact auraBAL token is in protected tokens list, so it can't be transferred to bribeProcessor by using sweepRewardToken. function harvest is supposed to call LOCKER.getReward and then swap received auraBAL rewards and deposit them in LOCKER, but it only can do...

Bribe.sol is not meant to handle fee-on-transfer tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Should a fee-on-transfer token be added as a reward token and deposited, the tokens will be locked in the Bribe contract. Voters will be unable to withdraw their rewards. Proof of Concept Tokens are deposited into the Bribe contract using...

CVE-2022-23066

In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to...

CVE-2022-23066 Solana rBPF - Incorrect Calculation in sdiv instruction

In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to...

CVE-2022-23066 Solana rBPF - Incorrect Calculation in sdiv instruction

In Solana rBPF versions 0.2.26 and 0.2.27 are affected by Incorrect Calculation which is caused by improper implementation of sdiv instruction. This can lead to the wrong execution path, resulting in huge loss in specific cases. For example, the result of a sdiv instruction may decide whether to...

Incorrect accounting on transfer-on-fee/deflationary tokens in Gravity contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The sendToCosmos function of Gravity transfers amount of tokenContract from the sender using the function transferFrom. If the transferred token is a transfer-on-fee/deflationary token, the actually received amount could be less than amount. However, sin...

Reward Token Transfer Failure Can Lead to Loss of Deposit in PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If transfer of any reward token returns False or reverts for whatever reason, users who deposited will not be able to withdraw their deposit. A malicious pool creator could abuse this to lock tokens from victims by using two reward tokens, one...

Unchecked low level calls

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contracts use low level Solidity .call without checking the success value. While these calls should never fail when the contract addresses are correct, we still recommend checking the success return value of these low-level calls. Note: All MIMO and...

An attacker can make users' funds get "locked" in the contract (the owner can get them out and transfer them back to the users)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user manages to be the first user to deposit into the contract, he will be minted shares and he can steal all the other users' deposits. Proof of Concept 1. The attacker deposits 1 token into the contract and 1 share is minted to him totalSupply and...

Fee-on-transfer tokens will mess up the internal accounting of the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the underlying token is a fee-on-transfer token, the amount of tokens that will be transferred to the contract isn't equal to the amount the supplyTokenTo tries to supply to the aave protocol, so the function will revert because the contract won't hav...

use safe erc20 functions

ERC721Payable.handlePayment core-contracts/contracts/ERC721Payable.sol50-56 ignores return value by payableToken.transferFrom core-contracts/contracts/ERC721Payable.sol54 consider safeTransferFrom to prevent any locks or loss of funds --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were...