ERC20 approve can fail for some tokens

Lines of code ReaperBaseStrategyv4.solL74 Vulnerability details Summary Some tokens like USDT do not work when changing the allowance from an existing non-zero allowance value. They must first be approved by zero and then the actual allowance must be approved. approve reverts for tokens like USDT...

pullCollateralFromBorrowerOperationsOrDefaultPool can fail on if _amount will set to zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Amount can be zero,as there is not no check in place, while collect modules do attempt to send it in such a case anyway. Some ERC20 tokens do not allow zero value transfers, reverting such attempts. As a result, a combination of a token set as a collect...

Ethos stil using LUSD (not ERN) will lead to confusion and ambiguity of the protocol resulting uncountable risk for the project

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Ethos stil using LUSD not ERN will lead to confusion and ambiguity of the protocol resulting uncountable risk for the project Proof of Concept Ethos is a fork project of Liquity with additional changes, supporting multi collateral tokens. There are some...

Callback tokens can cause re-entrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There are many places in the code where token transfers are in the middle of a function more specifically, both after and before state changes. It is very important not to pass control to untrusted code in these calls, as they could potentially...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #460 [1677510923458]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 460 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The safeTransferFrom function on the ClearingHouse is normally used when an OpenSea auction successfully ends and the required ERC20/WETH have been transferred to the...

reentrancy in MultiRewardStaking::claimRewards for tokens with transfer callbacks, like erc777

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can drain all the tokens from MultiRewardStaking Proof of Concept In claimtRewards important state changes are done after interactions with tokens: File: MultiRewardStaking.sol function claimRewardsaddress user, IERC20 memory rewardTokens...

Use safeTransferFrom and safeApprove foe the reward tokens in Vault Controller instead of transferFrom and approve functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In 3 functions return values of ERC20 contracts either approve or transferFrom are not checked : fundStakingRewards ; addStakingRewardsTokens and handleInitialDeposit. This is especially dangerous in the addStakingRewardsTokens function, because in this...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #664 [1675726078144]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 664 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1 ERC20 Quest: withdrawFee function should only be able to be called once instead of multiple times Issue: The withdrawFee function can be called multiple times by admin after a quest ends, resulting in more than t...

Some ERC20 tokens deduct a fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 token implementations have a fee that is charged on each token transfer. This means that the transferred amount isn't exactly what the receiver will get. A call to ERC20token.transferrecipient, 100 with a fee-on-transfer of 5% will entitle the...

_transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens Summary Setting directly typeuint256.max won't work for USDTTether. This is done at both transferFromCaller: NFTDriver.solL289 AddressDriver.solL174 Description Some tokens like USDT do not work...

ERC20 TRANSFER AND TRANSFERFROM ARE NOT CHECKING FOR THE ZERO ADDRESS OF to AND from, DURING EXECUTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 standard tokens check for the != address0 condition in the transfer and transferFrom functions for the to address and from address in order to make sure funds are not transfered to zero address and balance is not updated in the balanceOf mapping fo...

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...

Losses in Pair and LendgineRouter can be generated if used with ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Losses in Pair and LendgineRouter can be generated if used with ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer Summary Some tokens token1, token0, ... are used over the code that can be any kind of ERC20 token. If this token includes fees on transfer, some operations will...

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...

Upgraded Q -> M from #598 [1674741102558]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 598 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: 2.minDepositAmount When the asset is btc, the minDepositAmount is too large when asset == btc , minDepositAmount = 0.1 btc , equal 2000 usd suggest: function minDepositAmount public view virtual overrideERC4626Cloned...

Upgraded Q -> H from #296 [1674743769839]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 296 as H risk. The relevant finding follows: Lines of code Vulnerability details A malicious liquidator could cause the NFT auction to fail and steal the collateral after end of auction. Impact Anyone can act as a liquidator and trigger the liquidation of the...

Exploring the Vulnerabilities of Seaport: A Technical Analysis of a Fake Signature Attack on Non-Fungible Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This finding aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of the sc4m trend, which emerged in August 2022, and has since been a prevalent issue in the WEB3 space. Despite efforts to combat this phenomenon, bad actors continue to engage in illicit activities,...

Lack of Input Validation in the Conduit Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description: The Conduit contract is a smart contract that serves as an originator for proxied transfers of ERC20, ERC721, and ERC1155 tokens. The contract's execute function takes an input of type ConduitTransfer calldata transfers which is an array of...

ConduitController: Smart Contract Initial Owner Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description The createConduit function in the ConduitController smart contract is responsible for deploying new conduits, or contracts that allow registered callers or open "channels" to transfer approved ERC20/721/1155 tokens on their behalf. The function...

[NAZ-M4] Missing isRegistered Check in sweepRewards()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the sweepRewardsSingle function there is a check to see if the ERC20 token to be swept is registered or not. While in the sweepRewards function that sweeps multiple ERC20 tokens instead of just one, this check is missing. With that in mind, sweepRewar...