Risk of Rogue Signer Control: Potential for Malicious Signer to Modify Threshold and Gain Unauthorized Control of Multisig Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The "Rotation of Signers" mechanism in the Multisig contract poses a risk of a single rogue or compromised signer gaining unauthorized control of the contract. If a signer with malicious intent or compromised credentials utilizes the rotateSigners...

Using controlled delegatecall could in calling _deployTokenManager.tokenManagerDeploy()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of delegatecall in this context poses a security risk. When using delegatecall, the called contract's code is executed within the context of the calling contract. This means that the deployTokenManager function is executed as if it is part of the...

Users do not get charged for the value their proposal will need

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Depending on whether the destination chain InterchainProposalExecutor's native token balance the transaction will either steal funds or will fail. Proof of Concept Users can provide an amount of native tokens they want to send to the call they will make ...

Reentrant Call Vulnerability in ExpressCallHandler Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details DISCRIPTION The ExpressCallHandler contract contains a potential bug related to handling the express calls. The issue lies in the setExpressReceiveToken and setExpressReceiveTokenWithData functions. Specifically, these functions don't properly handle reentrant...

InterchainTokenService.expressReceiveTokenWithData does not apply Check-Effect-Interaction mode

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact InterchainTokenService.expressReceiveTokenWithData does not apply the Check-Effect-Interaction pattern. In some edge cases, the caller can lose funds. Proof of Concept The life cycle of sending token across chains contains 3 phases: //P1: launch on sourc...

onlyProxy MODIFIER CAN BE BYPASSED BY A MALICIOUS PROXY CONTRACT AND CAN PUSH THE IMPLEMENTATION CONTRACT INTO AN UNDESIRABLE STATE

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Upgradeable.onlyProxy modifier is used to ensure that a function can only be called by the proxy and can not be directly called in the Upgradeable.sol contract. The onlyProxy modifier implementation is as follows: modifier onlyProxy // Prevent setup...

Collateralization ratio manipulation can cause a denial of service

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Stablecoin redeeming and profit accruing in the SavingsVest contract can be blocked when the collateralization ratio has overflown. Proof of Concept The mitigation recommended in 31 and implemented by the sponsor in this commit doesn't resolve the root...

Voter/caller's eth will be stuck in contracts if the proposal fails to pass

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Voters of AxelarServiceGovernance.sol:executeMultisigProposal or callers of Multisig.sol:execute will have their eth stuck in the contract if they can't make the proposal/call pass the vote count checks in onlySigners. Proof of Concept...

Gas refunds are returned to the wrong address, leading to loss of funds for the payer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact To pay for cross-chain messages/calls, a user/third-party service must pay a reasonable fee in this case using the native token. However, often times a user will overpay to ensure that there is an adequate buffer for their tx to successfully succeed in...

InitProxy and Proxy may revert preventing successful init

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When InitProxy is constructed the owner is set to be the sender address so that the init function can only be called by the same sender address. If the init function is receiving a new owner, the implementation may revert during setup preventing proxy...

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...

The _currentExchangeRate of the Vault contract can't increase, and always be lower than or equal to _assetUnit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The currentExchangeRate of the Vault contract can not increase, and always be lower than or equal to assetUnit. Therefore, when the vault is undercollateralized currentExchangeRate assetUnit, it can't be further collateralized. Proof of concept function...

Using supportsERC165InterfaceUnchecked() might break LSP functionality for certain contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description Throughout the codebase, the protocol uses the supportsERC165InterfaceUnchecked function from Openzeppelin's ERC165Checker.sol to check for the support of ERC-165 interface IDs. However, supportsERC165InterfaceUnchecked only checks if the call t...

IF THE UNDERLYING ASSET IS A FEE ON TRANSFER TOKEN IT COULD BREAK THE INTERNAL ACCOUNTING OF THE VAULT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Vault.deposit function is used by the users to deposit assets to the vault and mint vault shares to the recipient address. The amount of assets are transferred to the Vault as follows: SafeERC20.safeTransferFrom asset, caller, addressthis,...

FIRST DEPOSITOR ATTACK IS PRESENT IN THE Vault.sol CONTRACT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Vault.deposit function is vulnerable to first depositor attack. It can be described as follows: A malicious early depositor can deposit with 1 wei of asset token as the first depositor of the Vault, and get 1 wei of shares. Then the first depositor c...

Incorrect amount of tokens is transferred before updating the accumulator and emitting the ContributePrizeTokens event

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can call the contributePrizeTokens function with a lower amount of tokens than claimed, misleading the contract to update the accumulator and emit the event based on the incorrect amount. As a result, the prize pool's internal state will be...

Contract can be initialized with arbitrary or non functional address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can pass invalid addresses to the initialize function, potentially leading to unexpected behavior and security vulnerabilities in the contract Proof of Concept The initialize function is intended to be called only once to initialize the...

Well.sol contract allows anyone to add liquidity to tokens with fee-on-transfer by calling the addLiquidity function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious user can call the wrong function for adding liquidity for a pair with fee-on-transfer tokens. The reserves information maintained within the contract suffers from an inconsistency which can result in various miscalculations for liquidity...

The constant product invariant can be broken.

Lines of code Vulnerability details description Let reserves returned by Well.getReserves as x, y and Well.tokenSupply as k. They must maintain the invariant x y EXPPRECISION = k 2. However, the reserves can increase without updating the token supply if a user transfers one token of the well and...

First liquidity provider can break minting of shares

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The attack vector and impact is that users may not receive shares in exchange for their deposits if the total asset amount has been manipulated through a large “donation”. Proof of Concept The attack vector and impact is that users may not receive shares...