Mint might result in too few tokens minted

Lines of code Vulnerability details mint of PrePOMarket.sol allows the team to mint new short and long tokens in exchange for collateral tokens. Long and short tokens are default ERC20 tokens with 18 decimals, while the collateral ERC20 token uses the decimals of the underlying base token. Howeve...

Overflow in BinMap can break pool

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The BinMap library performs multiplication on int32 values that can potentially overflow and cause the corresponding function calls to revert. The functions in question are used by essential Pool methods such as Pool.addLiquidity or Pool.swap and an...

An operator can bypass the withdrawal limits

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An operator can bypass the withdrawal limits if he withdraws when the lastUserPeriodReset + userPeriodLength or lastGlobalPeriodReset + globalPeriodLength is less than the block.timestamp. This causes a DOS as well since globalAmountWithdrawnThisPeriod...

TWA update is not correct

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Time-warped-price is updated incorrectly and this affects moving bins. Proof of Concept The protocol updates twa on every swap and uses that to decide how to move bins. But in the function swap, the delta's endSqrtPrice can not contribute negatively to t...

[NAZ-M2] Usage of send() Can Result In Revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Several functions are sendusing is used by the across several functions to transfer ETH/WETH. send uses a fixed amount of gas, which was used to prevent reentrancy. However this limit your protocol to interact with others contracts that need more than th...

Downcast can lead to overflow and impact the functionality to remove an asset in NFTFloorOracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When adding a new asset, the index for the last asset will be saved and downcasted on L284. If the number of assets is bigger than 256, the downcasting operation will lead to a silent overflow. Consequentially, the incorrect index will be stored. This ca...

Update initializer library to prevent reentrancy during initialization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Since proxied contracts do not make use of a constructor, it's common to move constructor logic to an external initializer function, usually called initialize. It then becomes necessary to protect this initializer function so it can only be called once. The...

[NAZ-H2] Update Initializer Modifier To Prevent Reentrancy During Initialization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently the project uses both : "@openzeppelin/contracts": "4.2.0", "@openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable": "4.2.0". This dependency has a known high severity vulnerability Deserialization of Untrusted Data Proof of Concept Because of the Deserializatio...

overflow in buy function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the function doesn't check if the input is more the supply Proof of Concept the function doesn't have any condition check of amount Tools Used manually Recommended Mitigation Steps check the input for maximum or requirement for max supply --- The text wa...

Buy can be executed after sale end

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In LPDA.sol buy function when all tokens are minted, the final price is set and the ether from the sale and fee is sent to the saleReceiver and feeReceiver addresses. Since there is no check to validate if sale has ended the function can be executed with...

wrong configuration can lock eth in LPDA contract forever

Lines of code Vulnerability details When creating an LPDA auction there are some sanity checks of the values used for the auction. But there is no check that the auction will not cause the price calculation to underflow after a while. This calculation of the price can underflow in getPrice in...

LAST PRICE DUTCH AUCTION SALE (LPDA) CAN BE EXPLOITED

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function logic of buy in LPDA.sol can be exploited by shrewd buyers to achieve the lowest finalPrice possible. Proof of Concept LPDA.solL58-L89 function buyuint256 amount external payable uint48 amount = uint48amount; Sale memory temp = sale;...

call() should be used instead of transfer() on an address payable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact call should be used instead of transfer on an address payable Proof of Concept The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address will inevitably make the transaction fail when: 1. The claimer smart contract does not implement a payable function...

The Ether for an LPDA mint sale can be locked in the LPDA contract indefinitely

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact After a mint sale using LPDA, all the Ether can be locked in the LPDA contract indefinitely. Proof of Concept In the src/minters/ contracts, the .transfer function is used for sending Ether. It is used for sending fees to the feeReceiver, and in the...

THE FUNCTION LOGIC OF _REMOVEFEEDER() IS FLAWED

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the admin calls removeFeeder, it will internally call removeFeeder that will have the feeder removed from feeders before getting its UPDATEROLE revoked. In the midst of doing this, the protocol forgets to update index of feederPositionMap belonging ...

Actor can input malicious data in the swap function inputs

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function swap has a data input parameter, which can be defined by the caller. Any user could therefore define a token address that they will send. By doing so user could create their own token and send it instead of tokenA and receive tokenB for free. By...

Payable functions do not refund excess and locks in

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All payable functions addCredit, increaseCredit, depositAndClose, depositAndRepay, closehttps://github.com/debtdao/Line-of-Credit/blob/698...

Replay Attack possible by processCalls function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Calls can be processed multiple times Proof of Concept The processCalls function uses the require function to check whether the nonce and calls values have been relayed, but it does not check whether the sender value is the same as the msg.sender value...

Missing msg.value when executing the cross-chain request

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the cross-chain request will not support smart contract that requires ETH payment in destination chain on execution side. Proof of Concept When a user relayers call and performs a cross-chain request, the executor needs to execute the request in the...

Incorrect _isAuthorized function logic

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The isAuthorized function in the CrossChainExecutorOptimism contract compares the message sender address to the address of the crossDomainMessenger contract, but it should be comparing the xDomainMessageSender value returned by the crossDomainMessenger...