Lucene search
+L

4 matches found

Code423n4
Code423n4
added 2023/05/11 12:00 a.m.14 views

Missing Proposal Validations in Funding Contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Funding.sol contract's validateCallDatas function validates the targets, values, and calldatas parameters for a proposal but does not check if the proposal is valid based on the current state of the contract. For example, it does not check if the...

7.1AI score
SaveExploits0
Code423n4
Code423n4
added 2022/04/20 12:00 a.m.9 views

If the funding discount is set to 0 in Funding.sol, getAmountOut() will return always 0, no matter the amount of asset in.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user doesn't set a minimum set to 0 of citadel expected in function deposit, can receive 0 tokens in exchange, no matter the amount of asset he's depositing. Proof of Concept The funding contract is used to trade citadel token with another asset. A...

6.7AI score
SaveExploits0
Code423n4
Code423n4
added 2022/04/20 12:00 a.m.10 views

Code credits fee-on-transfer tokens for amount stated, not amount transferred

Lines of code Vulnerability details Some ERC20 tokens, such as Tether 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, asset calculations will be incorrect. While the planned tokens to be used may not...

6.9AI score
SaveExploits0
Code423n4
Code423n4
added 2022/04/20 12:00 a.m.10 views

Funding.deposit() doesn't work if there is no discount set

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Funding contract's deposit function uses the getAmountOut function to determine how many citadel tokens the user should receive for their deposit. But, if no discount is set, the function always returns 0. Now the deposit function tries to deposit 0...

6.8AI score
SaveExploits0
Rows per page
Query Builder