Cross-Contract Reentrancy can occur during burnToMint

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Cross Contract re-entrancy can occur due to not following CEI Proof of Concept 1. Attacker can call burnToMint, with any of the tokenId he owns! 2. This calls the burnToMint in GenCore, which mints the the new token from the to be minted collection...

AuctionDemo::claimAuction() - L105: Logic bug in the conditional statement where the timestamp check should be > instead of >=.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Would enable the winning bidder/bid to be selected WHILE it's still possible to bid higher in the auction. I.e. current comparison logic makes it possible to select auction winner while the auction isnt over yet. there's the risk of the true/valid highes...

Bid's array can be overloaded with dust bids to break AuctionDemo funcionality.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Bids to the auction can be created using any msg.value via participateToAuction method and are stored in an array within the mapping auctionInfoData. However, all important methods claimAuction, returnHighestBid, returnHighestBidder,...

High possibility of DOS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the claimAuction function there is a high possibility of DOS where the auction winner is unable to claim the NFT due to high gas cost or not enough gas, this is due to the functions having three loops on same array of all bids, they are in the...

Contract can be drained from the claimAuction contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to the way the claimAuction function is written, it is also possible to drain the contract when sending bids back to users. This can only happen if the highestBidder made multiple bids which is likely. Proof of Concept In this section of the...

AuctionDemo::claimAuction() - L105: Logic bug in the conditional statement where the timestamp check should be > instead of >=.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Would enable the winning bidder/bid to be selected WHILE it's still possible to bid higher in the auction. I.e. current comparison logic makes it possible to select auction winner while the auction isnt over yet. there's the risk of the true/valid highes...

Last token of maximum supply can be paid, but it isn't minted nor reverted.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description collectionCirculationSupply is incremented in each mint and it's used to check if the mint don't overtakes the collection's max supply. However, it increments before the check, which makes that although last token is in the max supply range, the...

WordPress Frontend File Manager Plugin < 22.6 is vulnerable to Arbitrary File Download

Software Frontend File Manager Type Plugin Vulnerable versions 22.6 Fixed in 22.6 OWASP Top 10 A5: Broken Access Control Classification Arbitrary File Download CVE CVE-2023-5105 Patch priority Medium CVSS severity Medium 9.1 Developer Claim ownership PSID 66e0e4c68ed0 Credits Dmitrii Ignatyev...

Re-enterancy in AuctionDemo contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact claimAuction function of AuctionDemo contract transfers the token to highest bidder winner and the bid amount is transferred to the owner. Moreover, refund is sent to all remaining participants non-winners of the auction via call function. However, if a...

Minting nft with Index 0 is not allowed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The constructor of the NextGenCore.sol contract includes an increment operation for the newCollectionIndex variable, ensuring that the newCollectionIndex start from 1. While adding or modifying addition...

DoS: Auction May Be Made Unusable By An Attacker

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the items of auctionInfoData array is sufficiently high, claimAuction, cancelAllBids, returnHighestBid will all not be able to be called due to the block gas limit rendering all funds locked and auction unusable. auctionInfoData can only ever be add...

Users get pay for multiple NFTs and only get 1 minted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users get only 1 NFT after paying for multiple or more than one Proof of Concept In MinterContract.mint users can mint more than one token and are allowed to pay for the number of tokens minted. function mint uint256 collectionID, uint256 numberOfTokens,...

Artist Royalty Split Proposal Functionality Missing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol's documentation specifies that royalty splits can be proposed by the artist and accepted by the admin. However, the MinterContract does not implement the functionality for artists to propose royalty splits. This inconsistency between the...

Royalty Payment Invariant Violation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The vulnerability in the payment mechanism of the smart contract significantly impacts the protocol's functionality. The root cause of the vulnerability is that, despite the README stating an invariant that "Payments can only be made when royalties are...

Missing highBid value update returnHighestBidder would return the wrong HighestBidder causing nft to be minted to the wrong winner

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact returnHighestBidder is used in checking who the winner is, however the code implemented in doing this was flawed as it missed updating highBid variable for the current higest bid found so far before next iteration. Missing this would cost function to...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #385 [1699689442074]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 385 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-04 ODSafeManager.allowSAFE function enables any allowed address to add/remove other allowed addresses Details The ODSafeManager.allowSAFE function is meant by design to allow/disallow any address to manage the safe...

payable.transfer() call will result in loss of unused Ether

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact batchContribute function carries out funding and transfer in batches by using the payable.transfer call. This is unsafe as transfer has hard coded gas budget and can fail when the user is a smart contract. This way programmatical usage of batchContribute...

Vote power can be manipulated to propose and/or pass needed proposals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The PartyGovernance contract is susceptible to vote manipulation, as an attacker could potentially acquire a substantial loan, even without collateral, within a single block before submitting a proposal. The voting process solely considers this particula...

No validation for the partyFactory contract !

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Malicious party contract can be deployed ! Proof of Concept Party contracts are created by the proxyFactory contract . In the initialize function , the proxyFactory contract address is provided by the user which may bring catastrophic consequences . This...

User loss his delegated voting power after delegation to another user.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details When a user delegate voting power to another user, his previous voting power from delegation has been ignored at getVotingPowerAt since in case isDelegated is true getVotingPowerAt returns 0. Impact Delegated voting power cannot be utilize...