NFT flashloan against governance voting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Specifically, to support a proposal, the voting power is counted at the time of the proposal creation time. However, there are multiple services that support NFT flashloan, e.g., NFTuloan . Since the voting power is counted as the proposal creation time,...

Initial spam of proposals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the initial phase, when not many tokens are minted, a malicious actor can start submitting proposals and later execute them. E.g. when the first token is minted, this first owner can instantly submit proposals to retrieve all the eth back from the...

Potential of underflow on _moveDelegateVotes()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker could get typeuint192.max of voting weight So he can create a proposal to withdraw an amount from the Treasury.sol and he can pass the proposalThreshold with no need to anyone Proof of Concept 1- Attacker buy one NFT and transfer it to addr1 2-...

Governance: users cannot endorse if they voted, which may cause deadlock

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It may cause a deadlock situation Condition: there is no proposal with enough endorsement majority depending on the endorsement threshold of votes are locked in the current proposal The votes for the current proposal are balanced between for and against ...

Anyone can pass any proposal alone before first VOTES are minted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Before any VOTES are minted anyone can activate and execute an arbitrary proposal even with 0 votes cast. So an attacker can pass any proposal i.e. change the executor + admin of the Kernel, gaining access to all permissioned functions and to funds held...

Race condition produces DDOS on governance : 20% minority can block the other 80% from passing a proposal.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An account controlling enough voting percentage to endorse a proposal can block an unwanted proposal from being activated. This can be done by frontrunning or by paying more for gas. There can only be one concurrent activated proposal so there is a race...

User Votes will stuck

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to insufficient checks User will not be able to withdraw there Votes after a non successful proposal. 1. The effect could be permanent if majority vote holders participated in the proposal, such that new proposal can't be created due to noone having...

Proposals can be submitted and executed sucessfully when VOTES totalySupply is 0.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When all contracts have been deployed and/or initialized, the OlympusVotes contract does not mint an initial token supply. This would allow users to be able to submit proposals, then vote and execute proposals if there has been no token supply totalSuppl...

User with 33% votes held can execute self-endorsed Proposal

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Two issues here with one being low/medium and another being high severity. Not sure if it should be put into 2 separate reports. For OlympusGovernance contract in Governance.sol , a Proposal submitter can self-endorse a proposal they submitted themselves...

[NAZ-M2] Centralization Risk with "voter_admin" Has The Ability To mintTo/BurnFrom Any Arbitrary Amount of VOTES

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact "voteradmin" has the ability to mint/burn any arbitrary amount of VOTES. Creating a centralization risk that allows "voteradmin" to pass or veto any proposal. Proof of Concept 1. Alice submits a proposal that benefits the users at an expense of Mallory's...

Governance wrong vote

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There is a function vote in OlympusGovernance smart contract. This function must accept a vote for or against a proposal. But it is possible that someone will wote not for the proposal he expected: this is possible to activate another proposal using...

In Governance.sol, it might be impossible to activate a new proposal forever after failed to execute the previous active proposal.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently, if users vote for the active proposal, the VOTES are transferred to the contract so that users can't vote or endorse other proposals while the voted proposal is active. And the active proposal can be replaced only when the proposal is executed...

Olympus votes can be locked in OlympusGovernance contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Olympus votes can be locked in Governance.sol OlympusGovernance contract. Proof of Concept When a user votes for a proposal, their current balance of VOTE is transferred to the OlympusGovernance contract. Those votes can be reclaimed once the proposal is...

Governance functions relies on the proposal Id which says nothing about the proposal content

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are submitProposal/endorseProposal/activateProposal functions on the Governance smart contract. The functions accept the proposed, which does not contain any information about the proposal. As a result, transactions of users can be front-ran. Proof...

While it is allowed to create only one proposal per person, you can still create more

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact After the creation of one proposal user can send his tokens to another persondelegate votes, so another person will create new proposal using the first user's proposal threshold amount. In propose method there is a condition that one user can create only...

Voting power determined by proposal creation block enables inherent voting manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The voting power for a Nouns holder for a given proposal is calculated as the number of Nouns held at the time of proposal creation. This creates an opportunity for voting manipulation by the proposal creator because they can specifically choose the time...

ONLY ADMIN IS ABLE TO CHANGE THE VOTING PARAMETERS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In both the NounsDAOLogicV1 and NounsDAOLogicV2 contracts, only admin is able to change the voting parameters which includes : VotingDelay VotingPeriod ProposalThresholdBPS MinQuorumVotesBPS MaxQuorumVotesBPS QuorumCoefficient This will ma...

Calling execute function for one proposal immediately after an ETH transfer to timelock contract, such as for another proposal, can steal the transferred ETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The NounsDAOExecutor contract is the timelock for this protocol. It can receive ETH transfer through the following receive and fallback functions. receive external payable fallback external payable Alice can create a proposal that sends certain amount of...

User should not be able to use more votes that he has at the moment of voting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In castVoteInternal function user can vote. And the votes that he has is calculated using the checkpoint when the proposal was created. This is not correct for few reasons. 1.Suppose in time t1 the proposal was created and in that time user1 had 2 tokens...

NounsDAOLogicV2's state() and proposals() will use initial dynamic params for all V1 proposals

Lines of code Vulnerability details state and proposals call quorumVotesid that utilize initial dynamic params for all V1 proposals by misusing 0 as a proposal creation block. I.e. new field is referenced while it is zero for all V1 proposals. This way all V1 proposals will use the same initial s...