when the 'v' value from a signature is 0, checkSignatures function can be tricked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact when the v value of a signature is = 0, the 'checkSignatures' in entryPoint function doesn't check if the signer is the owner of the wallet and assumes that it is from a contract, a malicious party could craft a signature with the v value = 0, and...

SmartAccount authorization can be bypassed using a contract signature

Lines of code Vulnerability details SmartAccount authorization can be bypassed using a contract signature The SmartAccount wallet supports contract signatures defined by EIP1271, similar to how Gnosis Safe does. Transactions to the wallet can be authorized by a contract that implements the...

Calling execute() and executeBatch() functions in SmartAccount.sol from the EntryPoint will fail

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function requireFromEntryPointOrOwner is being called within the execute and executeBatch functions to check if the msg.sender is either the owner or the EntryPoint contract, but these functions have onlyOwner modifier, which will only allow the owne...

Bypass SmartAccount handlePayment

Lines of code Vulnerability details Payment can be small/zero due to rounding down if tokenGasPriceFactor is sufficiently large and function won't revert on zero transfer. Validate tokenGasPriceFactor. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Uninialized or front-runnable .init function in proxy implementation contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Uninialized or front-runnable .init function in proxy implementation contract Impact DoS for all users' smart account proxies leading to locked funds forever. Proof of Concept Nowhere in the code the SmartAccount.sol implementation contract is initialized by...

_validateSignature should not revert on invalid signature (EIP-4337)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Results in unexpected behavior in the EntryPoint contract. Proof of Concept As said in the official specification of EIP-4337: "If the account does not support signature aggregation, it MUST validate the signature is a valid signature of the userOpHash,...

The isContract function in LibAddress that uses EXTCODESIZE can be vulnerable to the "Contract Creation Code Execution" attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It will allow the attacker to potentially execute malicious code in the implementation contract at Proof of Concept contract Victim function isContractaddress account public view returnsbool uint32 csize; assembly size := extcodesizeaccount return csize ...

[Medium-2] Sponsored transactions can be abused for profit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a user executes a transaction with their SmartAccount, the function execTransaction can be used. In some cases, some protocols want to get promoted and will sponsorize users of the abstract wallet transactions by refunding them back their gas usage ...

Theft of funds under relaying the transaction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The execTransaction function is designed to accept a relayed transaction with a transaction cost refund. At the beginning of the function, the startGas value is calculated as the amount of gas that the relayer will approximately spend on the...

SmartAccount wallet creation can be backdoored

Lines of code Vulnerability details At wallet creation time, an attacker can temporarily swap the address of the entrypoint to install a backdoor in the form of a registered module in the wallet. Since wallets don't necessarily need to be created by their owners, an attacker can frontrun the wall...

SmartAccount implementation contract can be destroyed by anyone

Lines of code Vulnerability details SmartAccount implementation contract can be destroyed by anyone Impact Locking all user's funds forever due to DoS for all functions. Proof of Concept There are 2 main reasons for this vulnerability: 1. The expected behaviour of interacting with the...

Unpreparedness for upgrades contracts that SmartAccount inherits

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The SmartAccount contract inherits many contracts, some of which have their own storage management logic. In case of an upgrade, adding new storage variables to the inherited contracts will colapse the storage layout. This will create an inconvenien...

Attacker can take control over each SmartAccount proxy and steal all users' funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Attacker can take control over each SmartAccount proxy and steal all users' funds Impact All users' funds can be stolen by a single attacker tx gas cost only Proof of Concept There are 2 main reasons for this vulnerability: The .checkSignatures in...

SmartAccount implementation contract can be destroyed by owner

Lines of code Vulnerability details SmartAccount implementation contract can be destroyed by owner Impact Locking users' funds forever due to DoS for all deployed smart account proxies. Neither implementation upgrade will be possible nor withdrawing funds. Proof of Concept The expected behaviour ...

Failed transactions may lead to fund loss via replay attacks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Failed transactions inside executeTransaction will revert and make the nonces remain intact. Thus a replay attack with signature arguments is possible. Proof of Concept One can make replay attacks with the reverted executeTransaction function and reprodu...

Destruction of the SmartAccount implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description If the SmartAccount implementation contract is not initialized, it can be destroyed using the following attack scenario: Initialize the SmartAccount implementation contract using the init function. Execute a transaction that contains a single...