Improper Upper Bound Definition on the Fee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The platformFee does not have any upper or lower bounds. Values that are too large will lead to reversions in several critical functions or the platform user will lost all funds when paying the fee. Proof of Concept 1. Navigate to the following contract...

_withdrawLiquidity() is Not Consistent With start()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact withdrawLiquidity details a number of scenarios under which a user may withdraw their liquidity. The first two scenarios outline cases where the credit line has either been cancelled by the borrower or insufficient assets have been lent out to the pool b...

Money Transfer Management System SQL Injection Vulnerability

A SQL injection vulnerability exists in Money Transfer Management System version 1.0, a money transfer management system. The vulnerability stems from missing validation of external input SQL statements in the id parameter in admin/maintenance/managebranch.php and admin/maintenance/managefee.php...

CVE-2022-25222

Money Transfer Management System Version 1.0 allows an unauthenticated user to inject SQL queries in 'admin/maintenance/managebranch.php' and 'admin/maintenance/managefee.php' via the 'id' parameter...

Sql injection

Money Transfer Management System Version 1.0 allows an unauthenticated user to inject SQL queries in 'admin/maintenance/managebranch.php' and 'admin/maintenance/managefee.php' via the 'id' parameter...

Inflate collateral token and partial bypass minting fee by directly transferring to _strategyController

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This bug enables partial bypass of fee while minting Collateral tokens through Collateral.deposit. Attackers can also utilize this bug to inflate prices of Collateral tokens, creating "unfair advantages" for early minters of Collateral tokens. Proof of...

FBI catches up with one of its Most Wanted, arrests head of advance-fee crime network

Some dont mind putting extra effort into making their crime appear as legitimate as possible by perpetuating more lies as long as they are guaranteed money in the end. Osondu Victor Igwilo is one such Nigerian scammer. The "catchers" 52-year-old Igwilo has been on the Federal Bureau of...

Fee-on-transfer/deflationary tokens cause problems

Lines of code Vulnerability details Some ERC20 tokens, such as USDT, 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 contrac...

[WP-H8] Wrong formula for the fee to be added to the incentivePool

Lines of code Vulnerability details The protocol takes part of the fees to incentivize liquidity, which is recorded as incentivePooltokenAddress on LiquidityPool.sol. However, the formula used to calculate the updated amount of incentivePooltokenAddress in the current implementation is wrong...

Wrong formula when add fee incentivePool can lead to loss of funds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The getAmountToTransfer function of LiquidityPool updates incentivePooltokenAddress by adding some fee to it but the formula is wrong and the value of incentivePooltokenAddress will be divided by BASEDIVISOR 10000000000 each time. After just a few time,...

DepositBoxERC20 does not support fee-on-transfer token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The transfered amount is saved without checking the actual amount of token received after the transfer. Proof of Concept saveTransferredAmountschainHash, erc20OnMainnet, amount; require ERC20Upgradeableerc20OnMainnet.transferFrom msg.sender, addressthis,...

Deposit Box Does Not Account for Fee On Transfer Tokens Causing the Bridge To Absorb the Fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function DepositBoxERC20.depositERC20 does not account for FoT Fee on Transfer tokens. FoT tokens charge a fee when transfer or transferFrom is called and it is subtracted from amount so the receiving address will receive less than amount of tokens...

NFT Creators Can Avoid Paying The Primary Foundation Fee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The primary foundation fee is charged on the initial sale of newly minted NFTs. However, the isCreator && !nftContractToTokenIdToFirstSaleCompletednftContracttokenId check can easily be bypassed to avoid paying the primary foundation fee by selling the...

[WP-M3] PRIMARY_FOUNDATION_FEE can be bypassed

Lines of code Vulnerability details The protocol is charging a different fee rate when the NFT is sold by the creator for the first time on the platform, the fee rate is currently set to a constant value of 15%. For other sales, the fee rate is only 5%. if isCreator &&...

Timelock for critical changes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact setDefaultFeePercentage, setCustomFeePercentageForCollateral and setCustomFeePercentageForSafe functions should have a timelock to give users time to react to the fee changes. ref: code-423n4/2021-11-overlay-findings120 Proof of Concept Tools Used Manual...

QA Report

Lower max fee percentage Currently fees can be set as high as 100%, may consider a lower max fee to reduce rug risk src/modules/TurboClerk.sol:38: requirenewDefaultFeePercentage if customFeePercentageForSafe != 0 return customFeePercentageForSafe; --- The text was updated successfully, but these...

Slurp can be frontrun with fee increase

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The TurboSafe.slurp function fetches the current fee from the clerk. This fee can be changed. The slurp transaction can be frontrun with a fee increase specifically targeted for the vault or the asset by the clerk and steal the vault yield that should go...

ERC4626 does not work with fee-on-transfer tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The docs/video say ERC4626.sol is in scope as its part of TurboSafe The ERC4626.deposit/mint functions do not work well with fee-on-transfer tokens as the amount variable is the pre-fee amount, including the fee, whereas the totalAssets do not include th...

Arbitrary fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function transferBribes has a parameter named fees. Essentially, it allows an admin to apply any arbitrary fees and send them to the feeRecipient. This makes no sense because admins can manipulate the amounts however they want with 0 restrictions. I see...

User can refer themselves

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can refer themselves when collect in any CollectModule that collect fee. The will lead to value leak as user can always refer themselves to receive a referral fee as discount. Proof of Concept Recommended Mitigation Steps Check if referrer ==...