Fee-on-transfer/rebasing tokens will have problems when swapping

Lines of code 110 Vulnerability details Uniswap v3 does not support rebasing or fee-on-transfer tokens so using these tokens with it will result funds getting stuck. With fee-on-transfer tokens, if the balance isn't checked, the wrong amount may be transferred out. With rebasing tokens, the...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a fee-on-transfer...

Fee-on-transfer/rebasing tokens will have problems when swapping

Lines of code 110 Vulnerability details Uniswap v3 does not support rebasing or fee-on-transfer tokens so using these tokens with it will result funds getting stuck. With fee-on-transfer tokens, if the balance isn't checked, the wrong amount may be transferred out. With rebasing tokens, the...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a fee-on-transfer...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a fee-on-transfer...

Fee-on-transfer/rebasing tokens will have problems when swapping

Lines of code 110 Vulnerability details Uniswap v3 does not support rebasing or fee-on-transfer tokens so using these tokens with it will result funds getting stuck. With fee-on-transfer tokens, if the balance isn't checked, the wrong amount may be transferred out. With rebasing tokens, the...

Fee on transfer tokens are not accounted for in any way

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fee on transfer or other unique tokens are not properly accounted for. This could lead to wrong accounting within The Ocean and eventual losses for the protocol. Proof of Concept The Ocean doesn't keep track of its balances when a user is wrapping a toke...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a fee-on-transfer...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details Impact The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a...

Fee-on-transfer/rebasing tokens will have problems when swapping

Lines of code 110 Vulnerability details Impact Uniswap v3 does not support rebasing or fee-on-transfer tokens so using these tokens with it will result funds getting stuck. With fee-on-transfer tokens, if the balance isn't checked, the wrong amount may be transferred out. With rebasing tokens, th...

Tokens having Fee-On-Transfer are not considered which will make the protocol in retaining less value than expected.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The balance of the custodian Addresses will be smaller than what is expected, making the protocol fail to maintain the delta neutral position. Proof of Concept The function EthenaMinting.sol/transferCollateral is sending the tokens using safeTransferFrom...

Protocols does not work with fee-on-transfer ERC20 tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol does not work with fee-on-transfer ERC20 tokens. When this type of token is escrowed, the amount is sent to the DelegateToken contract. After that the underlying amount delegateInfo.amount is stored in the...

Non-standart ERC20 tokens are not supported

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue here is that some non-standard ERC20 tokens can have fee-on-transfer Proof of Concept The issue here is that some non-standard ERC20 tokens can have fee-on-transfer, so it could cause a problem that the protocol will lose tokens on each call...

Fee on Transfer tokens cause incorrect accounting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorrect accounting for fee on transfer tokens Proof of Concept Delegate accepts all ERC20 token types as specified by the contest page. Some ERC20 tokens include a fee on transfer which means means that the amount of tokens sent to the contract will be...

IF FEE ON TRANSFER TOKEN CONFIGURED AS THE VOTING TOKEN FOR THE VAULT, IT COULD INTRODUCE ACCOUNTING ERROR FOR VOTE COUNT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The NFTBoostVault.lockTokens function is used to transfer the ERC20 voting token of the vault and the ERC1155 NFT to the NFTBoostVault contract after accounting for their respective votes. The issue here is that a fee-on-transfer token could get selected...

IF THE UNDERLYING ASSET IS A FEE ON TRANSFER TOKEN IT COULD BREAK THE INTERNAL ACCOUNTING OF THE VAULT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Vault.deposit function is used by the users to deposit assets to the vault and mint vault shares to the recipient address. The amount of assets are transferred to the Vault as follows: SafeERC20.safeTransferFrom asset, caller, addressthis,...

the swapFrom() function allows the Fee On Transfer tokens and _setReserves doesn't revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the protocol supports the fee on transfer tokens and has implemented a special capable function for it and wants to not allow and revert the fee on transfer tokens in normal SwapFrom function as it says in comments of swapfrom function @dev MUST revert i...

Well.sol contract allows anyone to add liquidity to tokens with fee-on-transfer by calling the addLiquidity function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious user can call the wrong function for adding liquidity for a pair with fee-on-transfer tokens. The reserves information maintained within the contract suffers from an inconsistency which can result in various miscalculations for liquidity...

Well.sol::addLiquidity() Unauthorized Liquidity Addition for Fee-on-Transfer Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The addLiquidity in the Well.sol contract allows any address to add liquidity to tokens with a fee-on-transfer mechanism. Although there is a another function available to add liquidity for Fee-on-transfer token name addLiquidityFeeOnTransfer. Howev...

Well.sol::swapFrom() Missing Fee-on-Transfer Token Check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The swapFrom in the Well.sol contract does not include a check for fee-on-transfer tokens, as specified in the Nespac. The comment states that the check for fee-on-transfer tokens is performed in the setReserves, but checks are not implemented in th...