A malicious user can avoid unfavorable score updates after alpha/multiplier changes, resulting in accrual of outsized rewards for the attacker at the expense of other users

Lines of code Vulnerability details Note All functions/properties referred to are in the Prime.sol contract. Impact A malicious user can accrue outsized rewards at the expense of other users after updateAlpha or updateMultipliers is called. Proof of Concept An attacker can prevent their score fro...

pendingScoreUpdates counts may be corrupted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Prime.pendingScoreUpdates is used to record the number of users whose score needs to be recalculated when addMarket , updateAlpha , updateMultipliers occurs. Record pendingScoreUpdates=totalIrrevocable + totalRevocable when the above metho...

guardian multisig should be timelock

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Per the rUSDYFactory.sol, The Natspec states the guardian address is a multsig address which will be passed in constructor during deployement of factory contract. @notice guardian address in constructor is a msig. and constructoraddress guardian guardian...

A user with the BURNER_ROLE role should be able to burn rUSDY tokens from the balance of a blocked address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are functions for blocking users: setBlocklist - setAllowlist - setSanctionsList - Suppose the user has rUSDY tokens. Then it was added to the blocklist. His tokens will then be blocked. There is a burn function where you can burn rUSDY tokens from...

Users can burn follow token without unfollow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of access control in this function can lead to users burning their tokens without updating related mappings. For example in the FollowNFT.sol contract, burn function will call unfollowIfHasFollower function first, and then burn token. but even users...

Decimal is not correct in fee calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The decimal doesn't match in the fee calculation, so this will break the fee calculation. Since fee calculation is very important in Mint/Burn actions, this problem can ruin the core functionality of transmuter. Proof of Concept This is the non-exact min...

Mitigation of M-06: See comments

Mitigation of M-06: See comments Link to Issue: code-423n4/2023-03-asymmetry-findings770 Comments Sponsor decided not to mitigate the issue with the following comment: This is as expected I agree that the issue is TOO broad and some of the described scenarios don't make sense at all e.g. the...

Burn logic issue due to lack of checking parameter 0 in burnWithReserve function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The token quantity is sent to 0 and then the token is internally burned, causing a logic problem. Proof of Concept 1. burnWithReserve - reservePPM = 0 2. calculateFreedAmount call - The result is scaled by the ratio of currentReserve and minterReserve...

Reentrancy Attack Vulnerability in StablecoinBridge Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The vulnerability can potentially drain the funds of the contract by allowing an attacker to repeatedly call the mint or burn functions and re-enter the mintInternal or burnInternal functions before they complete. Proof of Concept To deploy the...

PartyGovernanceNFT.sol: burn function does not reduce totalVotingPower making it impossible to reach unanimous votes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact With the new version of the Party protocol the PartyGovernanceNFT.burn function has been introduced. This function is used to burn party cards. According to the sponsor the initial purpose of this function was to enable the InitialETHCrowdfund contract t...

Audit Findings for BYTES Token Contract - Burn Function Vulnerabilities

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact BYTES2.burn: The function burn allows authorized callers to burn BYTES tokens from a specific address and mint DAO taxes. However, the function does not check if the from address actually has enough BYTES tokens to burn. This means that an attacker could...

Permit authorized callers can burn any amount of BYTES 2.0 tokens from an arbitrary address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Using the burn function of BYTES 2.0, an authorized caller can burn an arbitrary amount of tokens from any address. I'm aware that it was mentioned in README.md of the project that this type of finding is out of the scope. but I believe it is still...

SUSE CVE-2017-5084

Inappropriate implementation in image-burner in Google Chrome OS prior to 59.0.3071.92 allowed a local attacker to read local files via dbus-send commands to a BurnImage D-Bus endpoint...

Lendgine#mint gifts the borrower liquidity and both underlying token as well which bricks contract functionality

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Borrower of liquidity can just keep borrowing liquidity as he will also get token0 and token1, draining the protocol funds. Proof of Concept Lendginemint calls Pairburn before calling mint to mint the number of ERC20 power tokens. totalLiquidityBorrowed ...

A Malicious User can Lock All Funds in an Option

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By calling the mint and burn functions with the 'amount0' and 'amount1' equal to the the option pair's respective balances of token0 and token1, a user can cause a given option's "Option.totalLong0" and "Option.totalLong1" to both be set to 0. The effect...

Insufficient Input Validation Leading to Excessive Token Burn.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This vulnerability allows a malicious user to redeem an amount of cash tokens that is less than the minimum redemption amount or more than the user's actual balance. This bug can be considered as a high severity bug, as it allows an attacker to burn an...

FIRST DEPOSIT CAN BREAK SHARE CALCULATIONS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Future depositors are forced to pay a huge value of assets to deposit. It is not practically possible for all users. This could directly affect the attrition of users towards this system. Proof of Concept A well-known attack vector for almost all...

Centralization Risks, Rug pull vectors

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owner can mint or burn unlimited tokens, functions can be used to rug pull the project. Proof of Concept Although owner role is supposedly not malicious, if owner's wallet keys are compromised, an attacker could rug the project. Based on the fact that we...

Ignored return value from "IERC20.transferFrom()"

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The return value from IERC20.transferFrom in "StableVault" was not checked, a malicious actor could first deposit a number of tokens without actually having it and then subsequently withdraw that amount of tokens from the "StableVault" Proof of Concept...

There is no re-register o re-assign function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no re-register or re-assign option for the smart contracts. Let's assume a smart contract is registered either through the register function with a new NFT minted or the assign function to an existing NFT. However, if somehow, the NFT is burned ...