buggy reward calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This is very similar to an inflation attack. Rewards increase whenever splitFees is being called which is anywhere buy/sell/mint/burn. The calculation is done like this: shareDataid.shareHolderRewardsPerTokenScaled += shareHolderFee 1e18 / tokenCount;...

Potential Race Condition in Rewards Calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If exploited, this race condition could allow an attacker to manipulate rewards in transactions involving the buy, sell, mintNFT, or burnNFT functions. The attacker may gain an advantage in claiming rewards before the rewards calculation is updated. Proo...

Holder cannot claim fee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Assume a user buys some shares and mints it to an NFT and sends the shares to a cold wallet for safety. The following happens: A user buys 10 shares using buy is called, the rewardsLastClaimedValue is updated to the latest holder rewards, the...

The user has the ability to bypass a fee claim protection for their own benefit while purchasing tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can bypass a fee claim protection for his own benefit by making multiple purchases instead of one, and as the result claim a fee part by part. Due to code documentation: The reward calculation has to use the old rewards value pre fee-split to not...

Improper validation can cause fee error and loss of funds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the amount is equal to zero the fee will be equal to zero, there is no check for amount should not be equal to zero the condition passes, it will fetch bondingCurve address then calcutes the price from LinearBondindCurve.sol,fee = priceForOne amount...

Not enough check for getPriceAndFee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Edge cases for getPriceAndFee can cause incorrect price to be returned and in turn cause incorrect tokens to be sent to the user. This can occur in the buy and sell function. Proof of Concept In the buy function the function getBuyPrice is called through...

Unhandled contract ownership states can lead to unexpected behaviour

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact OpenZeppelin's Ownable2step library's ownership states can lead unexpected behavior in certain functions Proof of Concept The ownable2step contract includes a pendingOwner entity which defines an address ownership has been transferred to but has not...

Require statement will allow WhitlistedShareCreators to create a share when share Creation is Restricted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Sharecreators can create new shares even when share creation is restricted. Proof of Concept 1. owner restricts share creation. function restrictShareCreationbool isRestricted external onlyOwner requireshareCreationRestricted != isRestricted, "State...

D.O.S due to wrong scaling factor

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The cNote token which is a fork of the CToken contract has a scaling method used to handle the exchange rate between CToken and the underlying token. This method helps scale the exchange rate because solidity doesn't handle fixed-point decimals. The...

Unchecked redeemUnderlying failure allows burning asD without redeeming NOTE, breaking peg.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The burn function does not validate the return code from redeemUnderlying. This means if redeeming fails, asD tokens could be burned without redeeming the underlying NOTE, breaking 1:1 peg. Attacker burns asD tokens and receives NOTE, but contract fails ...

Too small deposits will result in no rsEth mint for the

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User will get nothing if the deposit amount is too small . Proof of Concept The getRsETHAmountToMint is for getting the conversion rate of asset to rsEth . /// @return rsethAmountToMint Amount of rseth to mint function getRsETHAmountToMint address asset,...

Precision loss in getRsETHAmountToMint

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact users may lose their assets Proof of Concept The price of rsETH increases against ETH price, this leads to precision loss in getRsETHAmountToMint. Consider a scenario that one rsETH worth 10 ETH; now if a user tries to deposit 9 ETH he losses assets due ...

getAssetPrice in ChainlinkPriceOracle.sol can return stale price.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary On chainlink oracle for every pair of tokens price updating time is different. After that particular time the price will be updated. getAssetPrice function is not checking when the last time the price was updated. So it may return stale price . So the...

The deposited amount is included in how rsEthAmountToMint is calculated and it should not. Second depositors get less rsETH shares than deserved.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All deposits, starting with the second one, incur a loss in the received rsETH amount. Proof of Concept LRTDepositPool::depositAsset helps users to stake LST in exchange for rsETH shares. First the LST is transferedFrom user to depositPool and rsETH is...

Changing rsETH address breaks contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact manipulating rsETH price Proof of Concept admin can change rsETH token address, while total supply of rsETH is used to calculate its price changing rsETH address changes its price. Tools Used Manual Review Recommended Mitigation Steps prevent changing...

Funds cannot be withdrawn from EigenLayer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact NodeDelegator contracts handle depositing LSTs into EigenLayer to earn yield. However the contract lacks functions to withdraw those tokens afterwards, meaning they will become trapped in the EigenLayer protocol. This breaks the functionality of the...

Precision loss in getRSETHPrice

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Precision loss and return zero price by Oracle Proof of Concept Since the value of staked ether increases, the price of RSETH goes above ETH price and leads to a precision loss in the getRSETHPrice function of the oracle, and RSETH price becomes zero...

Switching to sales model 3 for a collection with pre-existing supply could brick the ' mint() ' function for that collection.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ' Periodic sales' model cannot be used in a collection with Pre-existing supply because of how timeOfLastMint is calculated in mint function. This prevents the system from flexibly combining different sales models in a single collection as intended by th...

AuctionDemo opens itself several DoS attack vectors

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept The auctionDemo.auctionInfoData map holds important info on auctions, and hold this info per tokenId. Needless to say, for many auctions that may become popular and/or long running, the...

Winner of auction status is not set to false after claim so eligible for refund

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Bidders funds will get stuck Proof of Concept After Auction winner claims token, his/her status is not set to false so he is eligible for a refund because the refund logic checks for all indexes with status set to true, which not supposed to be so. So th...