Fee on transfer tokens will not behave as expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Numoen, it does not specifically restrict the type of ERC20 collateral used for borrowing. If fee on transfer tokens is/are entailed, it will specifically make mint revert in Lendgine.sol when checking if balanceAfter balanceBefore + collateral. Proof...

mint() function logic will break with fee-on-transfer(deflationary) tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact with deflationary token mint function never succeed Proof of Concept mint function checking if balanceAfter totalLiquidity revert CompleteUtilizationError; // next check is for the case when liquidity is borrowed but then was completely accrued if...

Fee on transfer tokens will not behave as expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact According to Whitepaper 1.1 Permissionless: "In Timeswap, liquidity providers can create pools for any ERC20 pair, without permission. It is designed to be generalized and works for any pair of tokens, at any time frame, and at any market state ... If fe...

A transfer-on-fee token or a deflationary/rebasing token, causing the received amount to be less than the accounted amount. For instance, a deflationary tokens might charge a certain fee for every safetransfer() or safetransferFrom().

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ALice calls stakeamount = 100 deflationary Tokens. Because the token has a fee upon transfer, StRSR receives only 99 tokens and staked that amount to mint but user thought that receives 100 tokens . But reality token received for stRSR only 99 . Proof of...

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...