Upgraded Q -> 2 from #88 [1679874664641]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 88 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-6 Spamming deposit and withdraw queues --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #773 [1679568911031]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 773 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: LACK OF SLIPPAGE PROTECTIONS FOR EOA IN FUNCTIONS LIKE ReaperVaultERC4626.deposit, ReaperVaultERC4626.mint, ReaperVaultERC4626.withdraw, AND ReaperVaultERC4626.redeem --- The text was updated successfully, but these...

The user may lose the remaining tokens once the partial withdraw completed in processWithdraws() function. Unable to access the old withdrawalQueue once the queuedWithdrawalHead incremented

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User lose the tokens once partial withdraw completed. Proof of Concept function processWithdrawsuint256 count external override nonReentrant whenNotPaused"POOLPROCESSWITHDRAWS" assertqueuedWithdrawalHead + count - 1 nextQueuedWithdrawalId; for uint256 i ...

Underflow if enough amount is sent to the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In function withdraw function withdrawaddress l1Receiver external payable override uint256 amount = msg.value; // Silent burning of the ether unchecked balanceaddressthis -= amount; totalSupply -= amount; they are using unchecked to decrease balances. Th...

_l1Receiver may lose the token amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact l1Receiver lose the token amount Proof of Concept function withdrawaddress l1Receiver external payable override uint256 amount = msg.value; // Silent burning of the ether unchecked balanceaddressthis -= amount; totalSupply -= amount; // Send the L2 log, ...

Reentrancy in validateTransaction function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract can be called by an attacker several times until the money are depleted. The contract owner may suffer financial damages as a result of this vulnerability. Description The validateTransaction function in line 66-71 accepts external calls and...

CVE-2020-22647

An issue found in DepositGame v.1.0 allows an attacker to gain sensitive information via the GetBonusWithdraw and withdraw functions...

PT-2023-11626 · Unknown · Depositgame

Name of the Vulnerable Software and Affected Versions: DepositGame version 1.0 Description: An issue in DepositGame allows an attacker to gain sensitive information via the GetBonusWithdraw and withdraw functions. Recommendations: For DepositGame version 1.0, consider disabling the GetBonusWithdr...

CVE-2020-22647

The CVE-2020-22647 entry concerns DepositGame v1.0, where the GetBonusWithdraw and withdraw functions allow an attacker to gain sensitive information (information disclosure). The issue is described consistently across multiple sources (DepositGame v1.0, GetBonusWithdraw, and withdraw), but expli...

CVE-2020-22647

An issue found in DepositGame v.1.0 allows an attacker to gain sensitive information via the GetBonusWithdraw and withdraw functions...

DepositGame 安全漏洞

DepositGame is an application. A security vulnerability exists in DepositGame version 1.0, which originated from a vulnerability that allows an attacker to obtain sensitive information via the GetBonusWithdraw and withdraw functions...

User Rewards will be lost in case of Withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User loses his unclaimed rewards If user withdraw all of his staked tokens he won't be able to claim rewards Proof of Concept the point is used to calculate user rewards and when a user withdraw all of its staked tokens the point will be set to zero and...

Reentrancy in staking function exit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user on calling exit calls the updateReward function twice. Proof of Concept First entry is in function withdraw burn Calling the Hook beforeTokenTransfer Which in turn calls updateReward Second Entry getReward call updateReward directly Tools Used...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #596 [1677228840417]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 596 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: withdraw and redeem function withdraw IERC4626 vault, address to, uint256 amount, uint256 maxSharesOut public payable virtual override returns uint256 sharesOut ERC20addressvault.safeApproveaddressvault, amount; if...

Missed owner accrual in MultiRewardStaking _withdraw() leads to reward loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function withdraw can be called from an approved caller to withdraw owner funds. The function accrues rewards for caller and receiver but misses the accrual for owner. If, for example, the owner didn't accrue any reward from the beginning of time and all...

Overflow tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If admin will add more than 255 tokens in rewardToken, there would'nt any way to withdraw tokens or claim rewards Proof of Concept for example: all users deposit their money.After some time admin's add more tokensa, length of array with Token grow's to...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #621 [1675724705438]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 621 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L2 - mintReceipt function lacks a check to verify if the quest has already ended mintReceipt function missing check for ended quest. This could result in a scenario where a receipt is minted after the quest has ended...

Malicious user can send the quest reward tokens to the protocol fee contract preventing users from claiming their rewards.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Malicious user can take advantage of the function withdrawFee after the quest end time and successfuly send the quest reward tokens to the protocol fee contract preventing users from claiming their rewards. Proof of Concept Every receipt minted should...

user funds loss in withdraw() of StRSR because code don't revert when calculated rsrAmount is zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function withdraw in StRSR completes an account's unstaking. but when calculated amount of RSR token is 0 code still burn user draftRSR and returns. This would cause users small amount of deposits to get burned and user won't receive any funds. as withdr...

PaprController.removeCollateral() only takes the price of the first collateral to determine whether the NFTs can be withdrawn

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unintended leniency of protocol will be taken advantage by users. Users can withdraw NFTs even if their debt of a particular NFT is higher than intended. Proof of Concept When a user wants to removeCollateral, he calls removeCollateral which loops each...