In CNote.sol, an attacker can DOS the money lending/debt repay functionalities for everybody

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Affected code: https://github.com/Plex-Engineer/lending-market/blob/ab31a612be354e252...

MAL-2022-381 Malicious code in @kindred-feature/deposit-limits (npm)

--- -= Per source details. Do not edit below this line.=- Source: ghsa-malware acf347d02beec3a3d13a86271815398239c952e9304c9a1caa86b9c53fac99e6 Any computer that has this package installed or running should be considered fully compromised. All secrets and keys stored on that computer should be...

Beefy vault can be removed without withdrawing all deposited tokens. Causing these token to be locked forever unless an owner is added this vault back.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Beefy vault can be removed without withdrawing all deposited tokens. Causing these token to be locked forever unless an owner is added this vault back. Proof of Concept function removeVaultaddress vault external onlyOwner requirevaultsvault != address0,...

Deposit and mint function will be rendered useless for users who are depositing using eth since balances will never be finalised

Lines of code Vulnerability details The penultimate function in NotionalV2.batchBalanceAndTradeAction calculates the withdrawals and finalises the balance as mentioned : but the following calculation will revert on an underflow since balanceState.netAssetTransferInternalPrecision is set to 0 in...

Deposit of wrappedFCash does not follow EIP 4626

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The deposit of wfCashERC4626 is not 4626 compatible. wfCashERC4626.solL168-L175 According to EIP4626 MUST revert if all of assets cannot be deposited due to deposit limit being reached, slippage, the user not approving enough underlying tokens to the Vau...

Lack of safeApprove(0) may prevent deposits and swapping of token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact OpenZeppelin’s safeApprove will revert if the account already is approved and the new safeApprove is done with a non-zero value. Users may be prevented from swapping tokens to Backd LPTokens a second time Proof of Concept There are multiple places...

Bad use of safeApprove

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function deposit in booster could revert when stake option is true if the contract has an allowance of the token for rewarcontract 0. The same in many contracts but in VE3DRewardPool.sol a user can get his rewards blocked. Proof of Concept If the contrac...

Since calling _lockVeAsset() incentiveVeAsset is always set to 0

Lines of code%20external%20%7B,%7D,-function%20deposit Vulnerability details Impact The if statement of the deposit function will never add incentive tokens because you calling lockVeAsset which will always set incentiveVeAsset is set to 0. Proof of Concept%3B-,incentiveVeAsset%20%3D%200%3B,-%7D...

in VeAssetDepositor and Booster contract don't set safeApprove() to 0 first and that token uses OpenZeppelin’s ERC20 implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact OpenZeppelin’s implementation of safeApprove won't work if approved amount is not set to 0. so the logics will fail if code don't set it 0 first. Both VeToken and VE3Token use OpenZeppelin’s ERC20 implementation and VeAssetDepositor and Booster calls...

User will get free funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If contract has an existing balance of WETH, ETH or targetUnderlying then user will get extra funds. Proof of Concept 1. Assume contract has existing amount 10 of targetUnderlying token 2. User calls burnToTarget function which converts all his passed...

Steal user's first deposit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Steal user's first deposit Proof of Concept The attack's flow is as following: 1. The first depositor wants to deposit X in bathToken.sol. 2. We detect it and frontrun 2 operations: 1. We deposit 1 of the underlying to the system. In exchange we receive ...

First pool depositor can break minting of shares

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact First depositor of the pool can break minting of the Bath Token shares Proof of Concept An attacker -who is the first one to deposit- sends 1 wei and bypasses totalSupply == 0 condition. Later a very large amount of donation to the pool and inflates the...

BathPair.sol#rebalancePair() can be front run to steal the pending rebalancing amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details function underlyingBalance public view returns uint256 uint256 pool = IERC20underlyingToken.balanceOfaddressthis; return pool.addoutstandingAmount; function removeFilledTradeAmountuint256 amt external onlyPair outstandingAmount = outstandingAmount.subamt; emit...

ExtraRewardsDistributor deposits don’t work with fee-on transfer tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are ERC20 tokens that may make certain customizations to their ERC20 contracts. One type of these tokens is deflationary tokens that charge a certain fee for every safetransfer or safetransferFrom . Proof of Concept The ExtraRewardsDistributor’s...

A well financed attacker could prevent any other users from minting synthetic tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the AlchemistV2 contract, users can deposit collateral to then borrow/mint the synthetic tokens offered by the protocol. The protocol also defines a minting limit that specifies how many synthetic tokens can be minted in a given time period. This exis...

Users Can Game Yield Distributions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact processYield restricts who can call this function to just the vault admin. Upon being processed, the treasury receives its fair share of the yield and the rest is transferred to the YieldManager.sol contract. To distribute yield, the manager calls...

PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory use hard coded decimals of 18

Lines of code Vulnerability details Once reward/deposit tokens decimals differ from 18 the calculations with a hard coded 1e18 will become grossly incorrect. This will lead either to receiving no rewards: say deposit is USDC with decimals of 6, being divided by 1e18 it adds 1e-12 to the rewards...

Users Can Prevent Excess Tokens From Being Withdrawn By The Pool Creator In withdrawExcessRewards()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Because pools will likely never be fully utilised by stakers while active, the following assumption in withdrawExcessRewards can be broken by preventing any receipt withdrawal: requirepool.totalDepositsWei == 0, 'Cannot withdraw until all deposits are...

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...

if user send uninitialized poolId to function deposit() of PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory, then attacker can cause user fund to be locked forever, and only unlock it if user pays ransom

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function deposit of PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory supposed to revert if user send uninitialized poolId by mistake, but if user does this, attacker can perform front-running attack and create multiple pools with his smart contract and be owner of that...