Upgraded Q -> 3 from #664 [1675726078144]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 664 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1 ERC20 Quest: withdrawFee function should only be able to be called once instead of multiple times Issue: The withdrawFee function can be called multiple times by admin after a quest ends, resulting in more than t...

The LendgineRouter.burn() will always REVERT due to the callback function forgot to send the due token0 back.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The LendgineRouter.burn will always REVERT due to the callback function forgot to send the due token0 back. The callback function pairMintCallback is supposed to send back amount0 amount of token0 back ...

Wrongly implemented modifier allow everybody to mint Rabbit Hole tickets.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As specified on RabbitHole C4 contest page, RabbitHoleTickets smart contract 'is an 1155 reward contract used by the RabbitHole team.' Meaning that the assets managed by this smart contract have value. Moreover this contract implements ERC-2981: NFT...

Incorrect totalSupply() function design

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In ERC1155Enumerable.solL36-L37 line, totalsuppyl of ERC1155 is calculated packages/v2-token/src/base/ERC1155Enumerable.sol: 34 35: /// @inheritdoc IERC1155Enumerable 36: function totalSupply public view override returns uint256 37: return...

Upgraded Q -> M from #404 [1674736828553]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 404 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑06 Owner can renounce while system is paused The contract owner or single user with a role is not prevented from renouncing the role/ownership while the contract is paused, which would cause any user assets stored ...

Upgraded Q -> M from #229 [1674661320954]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 229 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Centralization Risk Contract: Impact: It seems the poolAdmin holds too much power including changing reward controller, rescue tokens etc. This can allow poolAdmin to impact all users by changing the config or draini...

abi.encodePacked Allows Hash Collision

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact From the solidity documentation: If you use keccak256abi.encodePackeda, b and both a and b are dynamic types, it is easy to craft collisions in the hash value by moving parts of a into b and vice-versa. More specifically, abi.encodePacked"a", "bc" ==...

Overflow/Underflow in interest calculation caused by lack of timestamp validation in _getInterest() & _getRemainingInterest() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker could manipulate the last timestamp of a lien in the stack struct to cause an underflow or overflow in the interest calculation. This could result in an incorrect interest amount being calculated, which could lead to incorrect payments being...

Centralization risk

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact MANAGERADMIN can set a very high value for minimumRedeemAmount which will ensure that all attempt to redeem amount simply fails Proof of Concept 1. User A wants to redeem amount 100000 using the requestRedemption function 2. Before User A can do so,...

Possible to block withdrawal of staked funds after recordStakingEnd or stakingError

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Node operators can lose their staked AVAX after stakingEnd or stakingError. Funds will be locked in the Staking contract, but impossible to withdraw. A bad actor does need to supply 1000 AVAX which he gets back and has not have real incentive to do it, b...

incorrect message signer check in ecrecover() and no validation for oracleSigner which would cause all the unsigned messagess to be considered asvalid ones

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact address oracleSigner has been used to verify signed messages by comparing the return value of ecrecover by oracleSigner. but the return value of ecrecover would be 0x0 and code doesn't check that return value is not 0x0. if owner set oracleSigner as 0x0 ...

Users may be liquidated right after taking maximal debt

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since there's no gap between the maximal LTV and the liquidation LTV, user positions may be liquidated as soon as maximal debt is taken, without leaving room for collateral and Papr token prices fluctuations. Users have no chance to add more collateral o...

Reentrancy attack allows to get loan for free

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reentrancy attack allows to get loan for free when startLiquidationAuction is called on last collateral token. Proof of Concept When user has a bad debt, then anyone can start auction for his nft. To purchase token, liquidator can call...

The patch is not sufficient: there is another insidious exploit that can cause the same critical consequences

Lines of code Vulnerability details Status Has been reported to and confirmed by Jeff ENS team Note to the Judge I am not sure whether I should label this as a newly-identified High or a mitigation hard error. The root cause of this issue seems as same as the original report, but this requires us...

User can send a proposal and instantly take back their collateral, keeping the proposal active without risking any Raes amount.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In OptimisticListingSeaport.sol, users call propose to set a new proposal. The pendingBalance is updated immediately for the calling proposer: // Sets collateral amount to pending balances for withdrawal pendingBalancesvaultproposedListing.proposer ...

rejectProposal/rejectActive/cancel did not update pendingBalances

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the OptimisticListingSeaport contract, pendingBalances represents the number of Rae tokens sent to the contract by the user when creating the proposal, which can be withdrawn in the withdrawCollateral function. function withdrawCollateraladdress vault...

Groupbuy: Construction of merkle tree allows some unintended IDs to be bought

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In GroupBuy.purchase, when no proof is provided, it is required that the provided token ID is equal to the stored merkleRoot: if purchaseProof.length == 0 // Hashes tokenId to verify merkle root if proof is empty if bytes32tokenId != merkleRoot revert...

GroupBuy may purchase NFT not in the allowed list

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When purchaseProof.length == 0, GroupBuy.purchase compare the tokenId with the merkleRoot. This allow any tokenId that match the merkleRoot to be purchased, even if they are not included in the allow list during setup. if purchaseProof.length == 0 //...

Error when handling deposit in the addToPosition function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function addToPosition from the Trading contract the amount of open fees are handled using the handleOpenFees function but when calling the handleDeposit function the wrong margin is passed, in fact the handleDeposit function gets addMargin - fee...

integer overflow or underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If an integer overflow or underflow occurs in the contract, it could lead to incorrect calculations and potentially unintended consequences, such as the transfer of incorrect amounts of tokens or the allocation of incorrect amounts of rewards. This could...

[NAZ-H2] Update Initializer Modifier To Prevent Reentrancy During Initialization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently the project uses both : "@openzeppelin/contracts": "4.2.0", "@openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable": "4.2.0". This dependency has a known high severity vulnerability Deserialization of Untrusted Data Proof of Concept Because of the Deserializatio...

suppliers funds loss because attacker can transfer his collateralized tokens when health factor is below liquidation threshold by reentrancy attack during executeLiquidateERC20() logic and transferring collateralize

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function executeLiquidateERC20 is for liquidating a position if its Health Factor drops below 1. The caller liquidator covers liquidationAmount amount of debt of the user getting liquidated, and receives a proportional amount of the collateralAsset plus ...

Solmate saftransfer and safetransferfrom does not check the codesize of the token address, which may lead to fund loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details In PirexGmx.sol and ERC4626Vault.sol, the contract uses the solmate library which does not check the existence of code at the token address. This is a known issue when using solmate's libraries. Reference: Impact Possible loss of funds and miscalculation. Proof...

Functions like AutoPxGmx.withdraw and AutoPxGmx.redeem do not provide effective slippage control

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As shown below, calling the AutoPxGmx.withdraw and AutoPxGmx.redeem functions would execute compoundpoolFee, 1, 0, true, which uses the hardcoded 1 as the amountOutMinimum input of the AutoPxGmx.compound function to further call the...

Exchange owner can consume all orders at arbitrary price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The choice of policy to use for a transaction is determined by the listingTime. The listingTime can be supplied by the caller of execute/bulkExecute and can be arbitrary as along as it passes validation. And the policy of a given order is used to determi...

User funds(ETHs) sent along with bulkExecute tx may be stolen by a reentry attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The funds ETH that users sent along with the bulkExecute may be stolen. Proof of Concept When a buyer send a bulkExecute tx with msg.value 0 with order of buying token with eth, the sent ETH may be stolen if the tx contains a malicious selling order whic...

Buyers unused ETH funds can be stolen (Direct theft of funds)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol has recognized the need to track buyers ETH in order to refund unused ETH by implementing the returnDust function and setupExecution modifier. The implementation creates an attack vector that allows the seller to steal the unused ETH...

Any use of fee-on-transfer tokens as quote tokens in auctions will result in freeze or loss of funds for users.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description SIZE auctions do not support fee-on-transfer tokens. The platform rejects taxed baseToken during createAuction: // Passes https://github.com/transmissions11/solmate/blob/main/src/utils/SafeTransferLib.solL9 // Transfer base tokens to auction contrac...

Double spending risk in L1 Bridge Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is double spending risk in L1 Bridge Contract. The user may call claimFailedDeposit to release their locked fund while they still have token balance in L2 network. Proof of Concept Let us focus on the L1ERC20Bridge.sol /// @dev Withdraw funds from...

The pledge creators might lose all of their funds by recoverERC20().

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a recoverERC20 function to withdraw ERC20 tokens from the contract. Currently, it checks if the token isn't an active reward token but it can be passed easily if the admin removes the reward token using removeRewardToken. So if the admin removes...

Chainlink oracle data feed is not sufficiently validated and can return stale price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Calling the Oracle contract's viewPrice or getPrice function executes uint price = feedstoken.feed.latestAnswer and requireprice 0, "Invalid feed price". Besides that Chainlink's latestAnswer function is deprecated, only verifying that price 0 is true is...

If bridge request fails users tokens are burned with no way to recover

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users tokens are still burned at source chain with no way to recover them Proof of Concept try HolographOperatorInterfaceaddressthis.nonRevertingBridgeCallvalue: msg.value msg.sender, bridgeInRequestPayload /// @dev do nothing catch failedJobshash = true...

Logical error in function getSwapOut

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. There is a logical error between lines 178-184 for function getSwapOut in contract LBRouter if amountIn != 0 activeId = LBPair.findFirstNonEmptyBinIduint24activeId, swapForY; else break; // end while if...

Upgraded Q -> M from 497 [1666363365064]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 497 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

ERC1155's Amount Parameter Manipulation To Steal Buyers' Funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details We discovered that a rogue seller i.e., attacker can place an order for selling N amount where N 1 of a specific token id of an ERC-1155 NFT collection. However, when the sell order is fulfilled by a buyer, the attacker would spend only 1...

Can overflow linear vest calculation and lock up funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a Claim object for a user has a large enough vesting time and/or linear vesting amount, then that object can get into a state such that the calculations in baseVestedAmount overflow. If the baseVestedAmount calculations overflow, then the associated...

User will lose rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User will lose there rewards even when vesting period has completed. Also the reward will get stuck in the contract with no one able to retrieve them Proof of Concept 1. Admin creates a new claim using createClaim function function createClaim address...

Upgraded Q -> M from 496 [1663882181323]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 496 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

An operator can steal an NFT after its listed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The ArbitraryCallsProposal contract prevents calls to setApprovalForAll on NFTs the Party owns. If an NFT is listed, calls to setApprovalForAll via the ArbitraryCallsProposal contract will succeed because the Party isn’t in possession of the NFT. Anyone...

Deniel of service with block gas limit.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An array of unknown size can lead to Deniel of service with block gas limit. Proof of Concept When smart contracts are deployed or functions inside them are called, the execution of these actions always requires a certain amount of gas, based of how much...

LP token price calculation suceptible to oracle attack manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The current calculation of the LP token its no accurate. Currently you formula is a the sum of the underlying asset value; sumPiRi / supply Sumatory of each token prices times reserve, divided by total supply, but this is suceptible to oracle manipulatio...

No Return Data Checks on Chainlink's latestRoundData() Might Return Stale Prices

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The updateExchangeRate function of FraxlendPairCore contract gets price using chainlink latestRoundData function. However it lacks the check on the return data and this might lead to stale prices. Proof of Concept ./FraxlendPairCore.sol:524: , int256...

[H1] Some admins functions are unusable because of misuse of variables in upgradeable contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ​ Admin functions in NFTCollectionFactor.sol are unusable through a proxy Proof of Concept ​ Upgradeable contracts cannot use neither constructors nor use immutable variables. The reason for that is they work behind a proxy which calls them using...

Malicious creator can create different NFT drop collections with NFTs that will be revealed to correspond to same ipfs token URI

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The following createNFTDropCollection function with different name, symbol, and nonce can be called to create different NFT drop collections. function createNFTDropCollection string calldata name, string calldata symbol, string calldata baseURI, bytes32...

If a MIMOProxy owner destroys their proxy, they cannot deploy another from the same address

Lines of code Vulnerability details When deploying a new MIMOProxy, the MIMOProxyRegistry first checks whether a proxy exists with the same owner for the given address. If an existing proxy is found, the deployment reverts: MIMOProxyRegistrydeployFor function deployForaddress owner public overrid...

Missing EIP-155 replay attack protection

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact publishProject/addMember/escrow in Community and inviteContractor/updateProjectHash/addTasks/setComplete/changeOrder in Project use ecrecover for signed messages to check access. However, all signed messages that is used to check access do not include an...

DOS on valid signatures

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It was observed that signature matching can fail due to incorrect updation of operatorIndex. Each loop iteration should reset operatorIndex but this is not happening causing matches to be skipped as shown in POC Proof of Concept 1. Assume...

Attacker can empty vaults

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Both MIMOEmptyVault and MIMOLeverage contracts share same signature/definition, an attacker can gain control of EmptyVault contract, issue a flash loan, and empty the vaults. Proof of Concept See the test below. In below test, EmptyVault contract is...

Use SAFETRANSFERFROM() instead of TRANSFERFROM() for ERC721 TRANSFERS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In NameWrapper.sol the wrapETH2LD and unwrapETH2LD functions call transferFrom on a ERC721 token. This does not ensure that the token is not sent to an address that is not able to properly support it which could result in the loss of the token. This is...

Contracts calls to main ENS services will fail. Plus, ETHRegistrarController#withdraw() with future upgrades will revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details This is a classic Code4rena issue. The transfer call has a hard coded gas budget whenever this affect another part of the EVM will be very harmful for those usage which will make the system and its users at risk. There is two parts of this issue; when the calle...