Vault does not verify that tokens were transferred successfully.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If for some reason the ERC20 transfer is temporarily failing, the user could call deposit for free or if calling withdraw the user would totally lose his allocation and funds. All the state variables would already have been updated at this stage, so he...

ERC20.sol is susceptible to classic ERC20 approve functionality front-running exploit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of concept The problem is perfectly described here The tldr; is that if you approved a person to spend 100 tokens and then you want to decrease his allowance to 50, if he spends his 100 tokens allowance before you set his allowance to 50 he will be able t...

[NAZ-M3] Use safeTransfer()/safeTransferFrom() instead of transfer()/transferFrom()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is a good idea to add a require statement that checks the return value of ERC20 token transfers or to use something like OpenZeppelin’s safeTransfer/safeTransferFrom unless one is sure the given token reverts in case of a failure. Failure to do so wil...

Fee = 0 in case supply is less then 10

Lines of code Vulnerability details In case supply is less then 10 fee will be always = 0, which is almost impossible with ETH but it's not 100% excludible with an ERC20 token in case it's value is very high and precision is low . A check that supply shall more then 10 shall be set. --- The text...

Malicious party active member can approve malicious contract to spend and steal party ERC1155 nft and ERC20 tokens via arbitrary proposal execution

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Let's look into the implementation in ArbitraryCallsProposal.sol // Check that the call is not prohibited. if !isCallAllowedcall, isUnanimous, preciousTokens, preciousTokenIds revert...

TribeRedeemer.redeem() might revert for revert-on-zero-value-transfers tokens.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact TribeRedeemer.redeem might revert for revert-on-zero-value-transfers tokens. Currently, it doesn't check when the transfer amount is zero and it might revert for some weird tokens. Proof of Concept As we can see here, some ERC20 tokens don't allow to...

Tokens with fee on transfer are not supported

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are ERC20 tokens that charge fee for every transfer or transferFrom. If this tokens are unsupported, ensure there is proper documentation about it. Proof of Concept 6 instances in 2 files: contracts/shutdown/fuse/RariMerkleRedeemer.sol...

redeem() doesn't support inflationary or deflationary erc20 tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A transfer-on-fee token or a deflationary/rebasing token, causes the received amount to be less than the accounted amount. For instance, a deflationary tokens might charge a certain fee for every transfer or transferFrom. TribeRedeemer.sol supports the u...

Miscalculation for cUSDT and cUSDC

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact getUnderlyingPrice stated that it would return the underlying price of the assets as a mantissa scaled by 1e18. However, the arithmetic setup on lines 503 and 507 could result in answers not scaled by 1e18. Proof of Concept 1e18 1e18 / 10 decimals is...

Should add check for Insufficient allowance

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is not check for Insufficient allowance inside transferFrom method. Proof of Concept Tools Used Code analytics Recommended Mitigation Steps requirecurrentAllowance = amount, "ERC20: insufficient allowance"; --- The text was updated successfully, bu...

Controlling the ERC20 Token contract from symbol is not secure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact BaseV1-periphery.solL491 in the getUnderlyingPrice function , the correctness of the CToken contract received from the instance is done with if compareStringssymbol, "cCANTO" on line BaseV1-periphery.solL490 This is not a safe way, fake contracts similar...

transferFrom() failure in _safeTransferFrom() could drain the pair

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For some tokens, tokenCon.transferFrom could fail and return false but not revert. Some malicious user can abuse it the addLiquidity/addLiquidityCANTO function to perform failure transferFrom but still get the liquidity, and later remove liquidity to dra...

# ERC20 transfer / transferFrom with not checked return value

Lines of code Vulnerability details ERC20 transfer / transferFrom with not checked return value Impact Not every ERC20 token follows OpenZeppelin's recommendation. It's possible inside ERC20 standard that a transferFrom doesn't revert upon failure but returns false. Code doesn't check return...

Reentrancy in repayLoan

Lines of code Vulnerability details Reentrancy in repayLoan Impact token.safeTransferFrom is called and after that state with the value is calcualted, if token can be a wrong or compromised contract this would lead to a clasic reentrancy attack that would transfer more from the balance than...

ERC20 return value not checked and not compatible with tokens like USDT, OMG, etc

Lines of code Vulnerability details ERC20 return value not checked and not compatible with tokens like USDT, OMG, etc Detail The ERC20.transfer and ERC20.transferFrom functions return a boolean value indicating success. This parameter needs to be checked for success. Furthermore, some tokens like...

Non-standard/Malicious token transfers may cause loans not to be paid.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Non-standard token transfers may cause loans not to be paid. Proof of Concept The TRSRY.sol has repayLoan function for the users to repay their loan as per the ERC20 token. The function is as below; function repayLoanERC20 token, uint256 amount external...

TRSRY.sol is susceptible to ERC20 approve functionality front-running exploit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of concept The problem is perfectly described here The tldr; is that if you approved a person to spend 100 tokens and then you want to decrease his allowance to 50, if he spends his 100 tokens allowance before you set his allowance to 50 he will be able t...

Not calling approve(0) before setting a new approval might cause reverts when used with Tether (USDT)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some tokens do not implement the ERC20 standard properly but are still accepted by most code that accepts ERC20 tokens. For example Tether USDT's approve function will revert if the current approval is not zero, to protect against front-running changes o...

ERC20.approve can be error prone. It is known issue. ERC20.sol could not be safe.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 - approve is not safe. Proof of Concept For approve, the entire contract depend on ERC20.approve assetContract.approveswapperAddress, borrowAmount; collateralContract.approveswapperAddress, collateralToSwap; Refer following articles for this issue...

ERC20.approve can be error prone. It is known issue. ERC20.sol could not be safe.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 - approve is not safe. Proof of Concept For approve, the entire contract depend on ERC20.approve assetContract.approveswapperAddress, borrowAmount; collateralContract.approveswapperAddress, collateralToSwap; Refer following articles for this issue...