Overflow on _moveDelegateVotes function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious actor can overflow his number of votes Proof of Concept 0. Alice and Kane each have an NFT token 1. Alice uses delegate function to delegate the vote to Kane 2. Kane uses transferFrom to transfer his token to the address Alice 3. Alice uses...

transferFrom() failure in _safeTransferFrom() could drain the pair

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For some tokens, tokenCon.transferFrom could fail and return false but not revert. Some malicious user can abuse it the addLiquidity/addLiquidityCANTO function to perform failure transferFrom but still get the liquidity, and later remove liquidity to dra...

# ERC20 transfer / transferFrom with not checked return value

Lines of code Vulnerability details ERC20 transfer / transferFrom with not checked return value Impact Not every ERC20 token follows OpenZeppelin's recommendation. It's possible inside ERC20 standard that a transferFrom doesn't revert upon failure but returns false. Code doesn't check return...

VotingEscrow: Unsupported fee-on-transfer tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the VotingEscrow contract, if the token is a fee-on-transfer token, the number of tokens received by the contract in the createLock and increaseAmount functions will be less than value. This makes the locked balance recorded by the contract incorrect,...

Some tokens may break VotingScrow contract in transfer and transferFrom functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Some ERC20 tokens such as USDT don't return boolean values from transfer and transferFrom methods. The require checks will therefore revert causing the functions to be unusable. Impact This would prevent withdraw and createLock functions t...

Unsafe usage of ERC20 transfer and transferFrom

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens functions don't return a boolean, for example USDT, BNB, OMG. So the VotingEscrow contract simply won't work with tokens like that as the token. Proof of Concept The USDT's transfer and transferFrom functions doesn't return a bool, so t...

Functions transferFrom() and transfer() will fail because of commented code

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact These 2 functions will fail just because the dev forgot to remove the commented code ex / sender / wich is very bad for users. Proof of Concept Tools Used visual Recommended Mitigation Steps remove the / and /. --- The text was updated successfully, but...

Unsafe transferFrom()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Yieldy.transferFrom returns false on failure instead of reverting. This might lead to moveFundsToUpgradedContract incorrectly unstaking and restaking tokens, potentially causing user or Migration.sol to lose funds depending on NEWCONTRACT and OLDCONTRACT...

Upgraded Q -> H from 94 [1655957384739]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 94 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: 2. Return values of transfer/transferFrom not checked Not all IERC20 implementations revert when there's a failure in transfer/transferFrom. The function signature has a boolean return value and they indicate error...

Upgraded Q -> M from 131 [1654475029272]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 131 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Recommend using safeTransferFrom instead of transferFrom for NFTs The EIP-721 standard states: /// @notice Transfer ownership of an NFT -- THE CALLER IS RESPONSIBLE /// TO CONFIRM THAT to IS CAPABLE OF RECEIVING...

Upgraded Q -> M from 74 [1654474712630]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 74 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Use of transferFrom instead of safeTransferFrom Cally.solL295 When buyers exercise the transferFrom function is used instead of safeTransferFrom. In the very unlikely event the receiving contract is somehow not...

Use ERC721.safertransferFrom instead of ERC721.transferFrom when you send out NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Buyers can accidentally lose their NFT if they send to incorrect address. Proof of Concept When the buyer decide to call exercise the NFT is transfered using transferFrom. This is risky because if the destination msg.sender is a contract and it is unable...

no-revert-on-transfer ERC20 tokens can be drained

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens don't throw but just return false when a transfer fails. This can be abused to trick the createVault function to initialize the vault without providing any tokens. A good example of such a token is ZRX: Etherscan code When such a vault ...

ERC20 transfers does not work on non-standard compliant tokens like USDT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory.sol Consider this function: function deposituint poolId, uint amount external Pool storage pool = poolspoolId; requirepool.id == poolId, 'Uninitialized pool'; requireblock.timestamp pool.startTime, 'Cannot deposit before po...

Re-Entrancy Attack in PermissionlessBasicPoolFactory

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since, the state change of pool.rewardFunding is taking place after the ERC20.transferFrom function, and since there is no whitelist of ERC20 tokens, therefore, it is very much possible that a malicious ERC20 contract can initiate a re-entrancy attack fr...

Not all ERC20 tokens return boolean on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens do not conform to the standard of returning a boolean when transfer is called. If one of these tokens is included as a reward token, the withdraw function will be irrevocably broken, and users won't be able to collect their reward or...

amount requires to be updated to contract balance increase (15)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Every time transferFrom or transfer function in ERC20 standard is called there is a possibility that underlying smart contract did not transfer the exact amount entered. It is required to find out contract balance increase/decrease after the transfer. Th...

amount requires to be updated to contract balance increase (2)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Every time transferFrom or transfer function in ERC20 standard is called there is a possibility that underlying smart contract did not transfer the exact amount entered. It is required to find out contract balance increase/decrease after the transfer. Th...

amount requires to be updated to contract balance increase (3)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Every time transferFrom or transfer function in ERC20 standard is called there is a possibility that underlying smart contract did not transfer the exact amount entered. It is required to find out contract balance increase/decrease after the transfer. Th...

amount requires to be updated to contract balance increase (5)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Every time transferFrom or transfer function in ERC20 standard is called there is a possibility that underlying smart contract did not transfer the exact amount entered. It is required to find out contract balance increase/decrease after the transfer. Th...