CometBFT's default for `BlockParams.MaxBytes` consensus parameter may increase block times and affect consensus participation

Amulet Security Advisory for CometBFT: ASA-2023-002 Component: CometBFT Criticality: Low Affected versions: All Affected users: Validators, Chain Builders + Maintainers Summary A default configuration in CometBFT has been found to be large for common use cases, and may affect block times and...

CVE-2015-6964

MultiBit HD before 0.1.2 allows attackers to conduct bit-flipping attacks that insert unspendable Bitcoin addresses into the list that MultiBit uses to send fees to the developers. Attackers cannot realistically steal these fees for themselves. This occurs because there is no message authenticati...

Authentication flaw

MultiBit HD before 0.1.2 allows attackers to conduct bit-flipping attacks that insert unspendable Bitcoin addresses into the list that MultiBit uses to send fees to the developers. Attackers cannot realistically steal these fees for themselves. This occurs because there is no message authenticati...

PT-2023-10320 · Unknown · Multibit Hd

Name of the Vulnerable Software and Affected Versions: MultiBit HD versions prior to 0.1.2 Description: The issue allows attackers to conduct bit-flipping attacks, inserting unspendable Bitcoin addresses into the list used to send fees to the developers. This is due to the lack of a message...

The roerouter hard-coded address error causes all fee funds to be sent to the treasury instead of the vault

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The roerouter hard-coded address error causes all fee funds to be sent to the treasury instead of the vault. This will reduce the capital utilization rate, because the fee should be added to the LP to earn interest, but now because the vault address cann...

Compound charges are sent to GeVault, making them potentially vulnerable to theft

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the previous version, the compound fee would be saved in the TokenisableRange before being deposited into LP, and would be deposited into LP after reaching 1%. After reconstruction, the fees are sent directly to GeVault for distribution through getTVL...

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...

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...

Fee on transfer tokens will cause users to lose funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens allow for charging a fee any time transfer or transferFrom is called. If a contract does not allow for amounts to change after transfers, subsequent transfer operations based on the original amount will revert due to the contract having...

removeFromAllTicks should be done before getTVL

Lines of code Vulnerability details After the mitigation, the TR fee is directly sent to GE vault. Suppose 0.1 eth trading fee has accumulated in TR. uint vaultValueX8 = getTVL; uint adjBaseFee = getAdjustedBaseFeetoken == addresstoken0; // Wrap if necessary and deposit here if msg.value 0...

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...

User funds may be blocked if tokens with a transfer fee are used as the underlyingToken

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user can create rights token pair pulling underlying token. To do this, it calls the create function . During the execution of the function, the user sends tokens to the contract address . If an ERC20 token is used as a tokenContract, then the...

lastFeeRound is only updated after adding fees and updating the cumulative fee factor. So when first calling updateTranscoderWithFees() in a new round, lastFeeRound will still be set to the previous round.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This could lead to incorrect fee calculations for delegators when claiming fees or pending fees. First time earnings are calculated in the new round, they will use the old cumulative fee factor rather than starting from 0 as intended. This effectively pa...

Bond Redemption is lower than intended

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Bonds redemption does not correspond to protocol intention leading to lesser ETH redeemed Proof of Concept Once the bond reaches maturity and the user initiates the redemption process by calling "redeem," it's possible for the user to receive a gain that...

Rounding Issue and Inconsistent Fee Application

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary There is a bug in the swap function. The bug can potentially cause incorrect balance checks and outputs when swapping. This issue arises due to improper usage of the applyFeeByRounding function. Affected Function: swap Details: In the swap function, the...

KEY INVARIANT RELATED TO THE FIXED_FEE AMOUNT CAN BE BROKEN

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The EvolvingProteus.applyFeeByRounding function is used to charge fees by rounding values in directions that are beneficial to the pool. Within this function there is a if condition which verifies that the calculated final amount is not less than the...

Auctions run at significantly different speeds for different prize tiers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Comments The V5 implementation delegates the task of claiming prizes to a network of claimers. The fees received by a claimer are calculated based on a dutch auction and limited based on the prize size of the highest tier the smallest prize. As a result, it is...

CVE-2023-33663

In the module “Customization fields fee for your store” aicustomfee from ai-dev module for PrestaShop, an attacker can perform SQL injection up to 0.2.0. Release 0.2.1 fixed this security issue...

Calculation Errors in calculateAndSendFee Function of OptionsPositionManager Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description In the OptionsPositionManager contract, specifically in the calculateAndSendFee function lines 365 to 367, there are several mathematical errors that impact the accuracy of the feeAmount result. These errors can lead to incorrect fee calculation...

PT-2023-28167 · Sourcecodester · Sourcecodester Resort Reservation System

Name of the Vulnerable Software and Affected Versions: SourceCodester Resort Reservation System version 1.0 Description: A critical vulnerability has been found in the SourceCodester Resort Reservation System, affecting the file view fee.php. The manipulation of the id argument leads to SQL...