Use of transfer() instead of call() to send eth

Lines of code Vulnerability details Use of transfer instead of call to send eth Impact OZSafeERC20.safeTransfer relies on transfer at the end, but with a check of the returning value. Same happens with OZSafeERC20.safeTransferFrom and transferFrom. However, the use of transfer might render ETH...

Possible lost msg.value

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Possible lost value in tryUseFETHBalance function call Proof of Concept In call tryUseFETHBalance can send value and the asset can be an ERC20!= address0. if send as asset ETH== address0 and send more value than totalAmounttotalAmount msg.value, the...

Gigaland NFT Marketplace 1.9 Shell Upload / Key Disclosure

Exploit Title: Gigaland NFT marketplace Shell upload and ETH private key leak Google Dork: N/A Date: 14/8/2022 Exploit Author: Sohel Yousef https://www.linkedin.com/in/sohel-yousef-50a905189/ Software Link: https://gigaland.io/ Version: 1.9 Category: webapps 1. Sell Upload after connectiong your...

@centrifuge/ethereum-contracts (>=0.5.0, <=1.0.3-canary.4) potentially affected by CVE-2022-35915 via openzeppelin-eth (2.1.3)

openzeppelin-eth NPM version 2.1.3 is affected by a known vulnerability. The following packages have a transitive dependency on openzeppelin-eth and may be impacted: - @centrifuge/ethereum-contracts =0.5.0, =1.0.3-canary.4 Source cves: CVE-2022-35915 Source advisory: OSV:GHSA-7GRF-83VW-6F5X...

Monero: Reentrancy attack in eth-monero atomic swap

A reentrancy vulnerability was found in the eth-xmr atomic swap smart contract, allowing an attacker to drain almost all of the ethers from the smart contract. The vulnerability was fixed in a later version of the smart contract...

Use call() instead of transfer() when transferring ETH in DebtToken

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When transferring ETH, use call instead of transfer. The transfer function only allows the recipient to use 2300 gas. If the recipient uses more than that, transfers will fail. In the future gas costs might change increasing the likelihood of that...

AxelarDepositService: When wrappedToken is not weth, sendNative may cause users to lose ether.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the sendNative function of the AxelarDepositService contract, the wrappedToken address is treated as weth-like and the wrappedToken's deposit function is called. If the wrappedToken address is TokenType.External token and is not weth-like and the...

Use of deprecated transfer function to send ETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Appears in: Migration::leave, Migration::withdrawContribution Vulnerability details Using payableaddress.transfer has been deprecated in favor of using .callvalue:..."" as the proper way of sending ETH. Using transfer or send will make transactions fail when th...

cash share amount calculated incorrectly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a buyout is successful, token owners can cash out their fractional tokens for ETH. The amount of ETH cashed out buyoutShare is calculated like this L268: uint256 buyoutShare = tokenBalance ethBalance / totalSupply + tokenBalance; with tokenBalance t...

Migration's withdrawContribution ignores the exchange between fractional tokens and ETH happened during Buyout attempt

Lines of code Vulnerability details withdrawContribution aims to return the funds to Migration participants. However, it uses initial userProposalFractionsproposalIdmsg.sender and userProposalEthproposalIdmsg.sender records for withdrawal accounting. Real funds structure is different after Buyout...

Not update ethBalance after users cash out in Migration may cause loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Buyout.cash function, users will burn their fractions to cash out ETH. The ETH amount is proportionate the number of fractions they have. So when someone burn fractions, total amount of ETH ethBalance should be updated accordingly. But in cash functio...

User can increase migration's proposal total tokens artificially

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are two functions that users can use to withdraw deposited ether/tokens from a joined proposal: leave and withdrawContribution. leave correctly decreases the total contribution from a proposal alongside the user's one: // Updates fraction balances ...

Not check fractionPrice > 0 may allow users to buy or sell fractions with zero ETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Buyout.start function, fractionPrice is calculated from msg.value and depositAmount, both can be changed by sender. And there is no check if fractionPrice is bigger than 0. So in case fractionPrice = 0, users may sell and buy fractions with zero ETH...

dont use transfer ,instead use call

Lines of code Vulnerability details details To withdraw eth it uses transfer, this trnansaction will fail inevitably when : - The withdrwer smart contract does not implement a payable function. Withdrawer smart contract does implement a payable fallback which uses more than 2300 gas unit Thw...

Small scalar may make buyoutPrice calculation incorrectly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Buyout.start function, buyoutPrice is calculated using a scalar = 100. This small scalar and division rouding will reduce the precision of the formula significantly. Proof of Concept 1. Alice call start with msg.value = 1e18 and depositAmount = 4567...

Native ETH transfer should use call() instead of transfer()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It might be impossible for some addresses to receive ETH via transfer because receiver address might have methods that exceed 2300 gas, ultimately leading to frozen funds. Proof of Concept Native transfer function has a limit of 2300 gas, which might not...

Usage of deprecated transfer to send ETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Transaction can revert Proof of Concept The original transfer used to send ETH uses a fixed stipend of 2300 gas. This was used to prevent reentrancy. However, this limit your protocol to interact with others contracts that need more than that to proceess...

Reentrancy vulnerability due to _distributePayoutsOf

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function distributePayoutsOf has reentrancy vulnerability which is being called by the external function distributePayoutsOf There are external calls in this function along with calls sending ETH Impact The contract JBPayoutRedemptionPaymentTerminal inherit...

Doesn’t check order.baseAsset.code when exercising call order

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is safe to check order.baseAsset.code.length and token.code.length in fillOrder and transferERC20sIn. Because SafeTransferLib doesn’t check whether the erc20 token is actually a contract. /// @dev Note that none of the functions in this library check...

Returned Value not checked when Depositing Eth

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In fillorder function, when eth is converted to weth, at line 335, it deposit the msg.value here. But it does not check the return value if the call succeeded. Proof of Concept IWETHweth.depositvalue: msg.value; Tools Used Visual Studio Code Recommended...