OpenZeppelin Contracts for Cairo 安全漏洞

OpenZeppelin Contracts for Cairo is a secure smart contract development library open-sourced by OpenZeppelin. A security vulnerability exists in OpenZeppelin Contracts for Cairo versions prior to 0.15.1, which stems from an unauthorized ownership transfer mechanism that could result in an...

Vyper's external calls can overflow return data to return input buffer

Summary When calls to external contracts are made, we write the input buffer starting at byte 28, and allocate the return buffer to start at byte 0 overlapping with the input buffer. When checking RETURNDATASIZE for dynamic types, the size is compared only to the minimum allowed size for that typ...

changeRegistries() from the Tokenomics contract changes different registries at the same time.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a case where either one of the agent, component or service registry are deprecated, attempting to replace the compromised registry necessitates an overall replacement of all the other registries. This not only utilizes excess gas but can also bring...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...

In _executeSetSignatureValidator, validate data.signatureHash and data.signatureValidator for non-zero values.

Lines of code Vulnerability details M5 - In executeSetSignatureValidator, validate data.signatureHash and data.signatureValidator for non-zero values. poc: solidity function executeSetSignatureValidator internal returns bytes memory nextProgressData requiredata.signatureHash != bytes320, "Signatu...

Unchecked token transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unchecked token transfer Proof of Concept Since the contract will work with many different ERC721 tokens, and not all of them are based, for instance, on the OZ ERC721 token contract. And some tokens can return False instead of reverting a transaction in...

The validateCreateOrderHash function is vulnerable to an incorrect token type being provided by the caller

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Invalid token types could be used with encoded order info, breaking expectations of the contract. An attacker could create an order hash using different parameters than what is actually encoded in the orderInfo. This could potentially allow the attacker ...

Missing validation to ensure that the _l2CoreGovTimelock parameter is not the zero address in the initialize function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The initialize function accepts a parameter l2CoreGovTimelock and does check if it's a contract address using Address.isContract. However, there's no explicit check to ensure that l2CoreGovTimelock is not the zero address...

Possible DoS of Election Process

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract SecurityCouncilNomineeElectionGovernor allows contenders to participate in the election process as nominee over function addContender. The necessary condition for this process is that proposal was created before and has status...

Unauthorized Admin Transfer Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The bug in this contract is that it doesn't handle the case when the pendingAdmin is set to the zero address address0. As per the condition msg.sender == address0, the if statement can be bypassed if an attacker sets pendingAdmin to the zero address...

Pending owner can be the wrong recipient of ownership

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can call the acceptOwnership function with their address as the pending owner before the legitimate pending owner has a chance to call the function Proof of Concept The transferOwnership function allows the current owner to set a pending owne...

Timestamp manipulation affects DNSSEC records on contracts/dnssec-oracle/DNSSECImpl.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact timestamp parameter to validate DNSSEC records. The timestamp parameter is passed as an argument to the verifyRRSIG function, which is responsible for verifying that the DNSSEC record is valid at a specific point in time. If the timestamp parameter can b...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #44 [1680620528235]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 44 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Low 1 RescueTokens doesn't have checks for fee0 & fee1 tokens. Admin might accidentally withdraw fee tokens that are supposed to be for the stakers: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #7 [1677668529704]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 7 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-01 changePayees Suggest adding to check whether newPayees are duplicated to avoid totalShares error function changePayeesaddress calldata newPayees, uint256 calldata newShares external override onlyManager ... for...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #619 [1675724510983]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 619 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 The function mintReceipt should check if the quest has expired on-chain as well The main function mintReceipt responsible for minting receipts lacks an important check to ensure the quest end time hasn't finishe...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #867 [1675460709593]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 867 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-01, ProtocolDAO.sol lines 209 - 216: upgradeExistingContract mistakenly removes the address value of the new contract if the new contract’s name is the same as the old one. This can be easily fixed with unregisteri...

Unpacking the "0x1626ba7e" Mystery: The Risks of Unidentified Fixed Values in Smart Contracts - loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of a fixed value in the require statement without understanding its significance creates a security vulnerability in the contract. An attacker could manipulate the returned value to bypass the require statement and execute malicious code. This ca...

Upgraded Q -> M from #404 [1674736828553]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 404 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑06 Owner can renounce while system is paused The contract owner or single user with a role is not prevented from renouncing the role/ownership while the contract is paused, which would cause any user assets stored ...

Threat: Replay attack vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The code does not check for the possibility of a replay attack on the contract, if the same order hash is being used multiple times Proof of Concept A replay attack is a type of attack where an attacker intercepts a valid transaction and resends it...

Signature Replay Attack when EntryPoint contract is changed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Signature Replay Attack when EntryPoint contract is changed Impact User operations can be replayed on smart accounts once the EntryPoint is changed. This can lead to user's loosing funds or any unexpected behaviour that transaction replay attacks usually lead t...