Users can get free collateral when using non-reverting on failure baseTokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A user calling Collateral's deposit function when baseToken is a non-reverting on failure ERC20 token, can get an arbitrary amount of collateral without actually depositing a single base token in the contract. function depositaddress recipient, uint256...

Lack of access control for sweepToken, refundETH, unwrapWETH9 in Router.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of access control for sweepToken, refundETH, unwrapWETH9 in Router.sol, any WETH token, ETH and ERC20 sent to Router.sol is lost and claimable to anyone. Proof of Concept the function unwrapWETH9 and sweepToken and refundETH has no access control an...

Unsafe usage of ERC20 methods

Lines of code Vulnerability details There are many weird ERC20 tokens that don't follow the standard ERC20 interface. Depending on the ERC20 token, some transfer errors may result in passing unnoticed, or some successful transfers may be treated as failed. The current implementation assumes that...

Insufficient support for fee-on-transfer type of ERC20

Lines of code Vulnerability details 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 IERC20token.transferrecipient, 100 with a fee-on-transfer FOT of 5% will entitle the...

MarketplaceLogic.sol doesn't support ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details MarketplaceLogic.sol doesn't support ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer Summary There are ERC20 tokens with transfer at fees. For checking if the transferred amount is the same as expected, code already compares balanceOf before and balanceOf after transfer...

Actor can send an arbitrary token when adding liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone can call addLiquidity directly and can input tokenId, params and data. The data inputs are never checked, so the user can send anything in there. Since the erc20 tokens routed are defined in the data parameter, user could send any token. Since the...

Upgraded Q -> M from #35 [1670345543949]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 35 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: No. 2 Any smart contract that uses transfer or send is taking a hard dependency on gas costs by forwarding a fixed amount of gas: 2300. If gas costs are subject to change, then smart contracts can’t depend on any...

Possible double spending issue for PirexERC4626 vault

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Solmate's ERC20 does not provide option to increase/decrease allowance, and only option to do so is by setting it via approve - which sets this amount directly. This poses a problem of double spending, when a user want to check current allowance, and bad...

PirexERC4626 and PirexGmx doesn't support erc20 tokens with fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details PirexERC4626 and PirexGmx doesn't support erc20 tokens with fee on transfer Vulnerability details There are ERC20 tokens that charge fee for every transfer / transferFrom. Different functions assumes assumes that the received amount is the same as the transfer...

ERC20 return values not checked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact 'token' is a ERC20 from LPToken.sol The ERC20.transfer and ERC20.transferFrom functions return a boolean value indicating success. This parameter needs to be checked for success. Some tokens do not revert if the transfer failed but return false instead...

deposit and withdraw emit the same event than mint and burn in ERC20 and can affect to Dapps

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Deposit and Withdraw emit the same event than burn and mint than ERC20 so it's not possible to distinguish in a DAPP than deposit and withdraw are not mint or burn and could affect to the DAPP logics. For example, cointracking.info could understand in a...

Unsafe ERC20 operations due to lack of contract length check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Functions executeERC20DirectTransfer and executeERC20TransferFrom replicates solmate libraries methods. The problem with this is that these functions does not check existence of code at the token address. If executeERC20DirectTransferand...

Without strictly verifying the attribution of balance and the size of the balance when refunding, hackers may use the attack to steal all ERC20 tokens！

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When using any ERC20 token to purchase NFT, after the purchase is successful, the 108th line of code in the contract LooksRareAggregator determines whether there are any remaining unused ERC20 tokens. If there is any remaining, it will be returned to the...

calling execute() may lead to stealing funds if some ERC20 is stuck on the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact if some tokens is sent erroneously or not to the contract, anyone that calls correctly LooksRareAggregator.execute will be able to steal those coins. to execute the function using ethers as payment, these conditions must be true: there is at least a trad...

Seaport proxy is missing ERC20 approval, so it can't buy any order that is listed using an ERC20

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Seaport proxy is missing ERC20 approval, so it can't buy any order that is listed using an ERC20. Proof of Concept function execute BasicOrder calldata orders, bytes calldata ordersExtraData, bytes calldata extraData, address recipient, bool isAtomic,...

Anyone can get access to ERC20 tokens in LooksRareAggregator contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The TokenRescuer contract helps to rescue eth and erc20 tokens and can only be called by the owner. However, any trapped eth or erc20 tokens can actually be taken out by anyone. Essentially the function and access control of the TokenReceiver contract ca...

Left ERC20/ETH can be withdrawn by anyone

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any remaining balance can be used by anyone. This can impact on users who transfers directly to the protocol by mistake. Proof of Concept If any user by mistake transfers ERC20/ETH directly not through the ERC20EnabledLooksRareAggregator or execute...

It is possible for ETH to be trapped inside LooksRareAggregattor contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user purchases NFTs with ETH or ETH and ERC20 tokens but with limited gas fees, it is possible that all purchase transactions are successful and have some ETH or ETH and ERC20 tokens left. The left ETH may be trapped inside the contract and the user...

No Revert on Failure, an order can be execute successfully by disguising them as NFTs.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 tokens don't throw a error when failed in transfer. A malicious user can pretend to be sending an ERC721 token while it is something else. Orders are getting executed inside LooksRareProxy.sol, an attacker as a maker can make an BasicOrder that has...

Re-Entrancy when invoking ERC20EnabledLooksRareAggregator.execute() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact We didn't check the address of currency . We don't know if the currency is ERC20 or not, and then just invoke currency.call. For these functions, we don't have any Re-Entrancy check. It will definitely lead to an Re-Entrancy issue on the currency side...