Return values of transfer()/transferFrom() not checked

Lines of code 377, 509, 491, 530, 42, 50 Vulnerability details Not all IERC20 implementations revert when there's a failure in transfer/transferFrom. The function signature has a boolean return value and they indicate errors that way instead. By not checking the return value, operations that shou...

Unchecked return value of low-level call()/delegatecall()

Lines of code 120, 141, 411, 184, 160, 189, 152, 444, 625, 638https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapioca-bar-audit/blob/2286f80f928f41c8bc189d0657d74ba83286c668/contract...

Calls to get_virtual_price() are vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

Lines of code 117 Vulnerability details getvirtualprice was originally considered to be a manipulation-resistant price - suitable as a price oracle, but it was later found to be vulnerable to a read-only reentrancy attack, where the Curve contract could be put into a partially-modified state, and...

Liquidation is not possible if trader blacklisted from blacklistable ERC20 token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a trader is blacklisted from a blacklistable ERC20 token while has an open position, it may not be possible to liquidate the position. Proof of Concept When liquidate position, it will eventually calculate the amount of token that need to be send to...

testing discord integration

Lines of code L1 Vulnerability details TEST --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Reentrancy in NextGenMinterContract.mint() allows exceeding max allowance and concurrent use of NFTs in NextGenMinterContract.burnToMint()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact 1. Bypassing maxAllowance in NextGenMinterContract.mint: Enables minting more NFTs than permitted. 2. Exploiting reentrancy in NextGenMinterContract.burnToMint: Allows acquiring both burnable and mintable NFTs at the same time. Proof of Concept The 1st...

convertedAmount set to zero because of bad math arithmetic

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The pool will be able to give an outputAmount corresponding to the rawInputAmount = 0 Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant...

doInteraction() won't mint tokens to user if interaction.specifiedAmount less than 10**12 and has certain conditions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the user calls doInteraction and executes Interaction with specifiedAmount less than 10 12 and a big difference in token decimals, the user won't get any tokens. Proof of Concept Core external functions like doInteraction will call the internal...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #534 [1702060375162]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 534 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-03 Consider use stETH/UDS oracle Issue Description: The sponsor has confirmed their choice of Chainlink as an oracle to fetch prices. Since all other LST price feeds are 18 decimal places, they will most likely use...

Missing onlyOwner Modifier Will Give Access To Any Malicious User To Change UnwrapFee Immediately

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any address can call the function changeUnwrapFee and modify or influence the unwrap fee, compromising the intended governance structure and allowing malicious users or entities to favourably adjust fees to their advantage for token unwrapping. Proof of...

Unwrap Fee Rounding Down: Revenue Loss, User Unfairness, and Reduced Confidence

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue with the unwrap fee rounding down can have several detrimental impacts on the Ocean protocol: 1. Revenue Loss: Due to rounding down, the contract loses out on potential unwrap fees, particularly for smaller unwrap amounts. This can significantl...

Proxy's logic contract relies on code in the constructor

Lines of code 122, 50, 25, 67, 98, 67, 22 Vulnerability details Impact Logic contracts cannot rely on code in their constructors, because proxy contracts do not re-execute the logic contract's constructor - only its initializer. Move all code in the constructor to the initializer function. File:...

Return values of approve() not checked

Lines of code 321, 215, 184, 450, 761, 217, 157, 234, 339, 386https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/t...

Reentrancy leads to minting/burning/buying without paying the correct amount of fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fee calculations depends on shareDataid.tokenCount, which is updated AFTER doing the transfer of token. That means, if the token is an ERC777 compatible token, users can reenter the function paying, for example, less fees on a buy operation. Proof of...

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 ...

Mint amount calculation in deposit is incorrect

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The calculation in the deposit function of the DepositPool contract is flawed as it factors the deposited amount into the RSETH price to calculate the amount to mint. Impact When a user deposits in the DepositPool contract, the amount of RSETH to mint i...

ChainLink's latestAnswer is deprecated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Chainlink's documentation indicates that the latestAnswer function is deprecated. This function lacks reversion if no answer is obtained, instead returning 0. Additionally, the reported latestAnswer varies with 18 decimals for some token quotes and 8...

rsETH can return incorrect price because of future EigenLayer strategies

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact How currently rsETH price is calculated? totalEthLocked is divided by rsETH supply. How totalEthLocked is calculated? It sums 3 amounts per every asset: 1 balance of LRTDepositPool.sol, 2 balance of all node delegators, 3 already deposited amount of asse...

No way to withdraw from the strategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact NodeDelegator does not have any functions to withdraw the underlying from the strategy. It does have a function to transfer ERC-20 tokens to the LRTDepositPool, assuming the eigen layer strategy mints ERC20 tokens to represent the share of invested funds...

DepositPool is susceptible to the inflation attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The DepositPool contract is susceptible to the Inflation Attack, in which the first depositor can be front-runned by an attacker to steal their deposit. Impact The DepositPool pool contract acts mainly as a vault: accounts deposit LST assets and get bac...

Multiple instances of reentrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This can lead to massive loss of funds and asset in Nextgen. Proof of Concept There are multiple instances of reentrancy in NextGenCore.sol, MinterContract.sol and AuctionMemo.sol. These reentrancy is due to the use of ERC721 safeMint... for token transf...

Users of ReraiseCrowdfund will potentially not receive appropriate voting power

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description The recent code update introduces the functionality for authorities to reduce the total voting power by invoking the decreaseTotalVotingPower function of the party. However, this functionality can lead to issues when used in the time frame after...

Hosts should agree before performing operations like setting ragequit, vetoing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since a Party can have multiple hosts, they should agree before vetoing or setting rageQuit, to prevent a single compromised host from having absolute decision, just as is done when hosts accept a proposal Proof of Concept In PartyGovernanceveto and...

It is possible to prematurely unlock assets that should still be locked up by setting the cooldown duration to 0.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It undermines the security of the cooldown period. Specifically: • Users who have assets locked up in the cooldown period could immediately withdraw them if the admin sets the duration to 0. This violates the intent of having a cooldown period to begin...

correct use of safeAllowed modifier

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the concept. Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps function...

During Safe Transfer, the Receiving User Loses Control of the Safe, Resulting in the Safe Being Lost

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Assuming a user wants to transfer their safe NFT to another user, post transfer Vault721::afterTokenTransfer is triggered. This function in turn calls the IODSafeManager::transferSAFEOwnership function to complete the transfer. The problem here is, that...

repayAllDebt joins system tokens to the proxy not to the Safe contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact repayAllDebt now calls joinSystemCoins with dest = addressthis, which in case a proxy makes a delegated call to this function will cause the user's tokens to be transferred to its proxy, then in CoinJoin.join it will transfer internal coins from CoinJoin...

Enabled modules after been activated cannot subsequently be disabled

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Modules are third party accounts and they have some level of access to the GnosisSafe depending on configuration by the account owner. Therefore, they are created and assigned by account owners and they can execute transactions independently but they...

A malicious actor can Block stuff the chain until the validator signature expires.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The signature of a validator is time bound of which after the expiration period the transaction becomes invalid, a malicious user might notice a time bound transaction made by the sub account and decide to block stuff the network until the validator...

ExecutorPlugin.executeTransaction() is prone to cross-chain replay attacks.

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function executeTransaction is used by executors to validate and execute transactions via a module transaction. the function takes in the input ExecutionRequest and does no validation of the msg.sender. therefore this creates an opening in which a malicious...

Possibility of security vulnerabilities introduced by creating ERC20ProxyDelegator instances on the fly using static salt values

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Security risks associated with deploying proxy contracts via deterministic addresses that can be easily calculated. In deployProxyDelegatorIfNeeded, in the case that extcodesizeproxyAddress == 0, then a proxy contract is instantiated ad hoc via new...

Potential denial of service due to out of bound gas usage

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The implementation of accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity incurs in complex and unbounded computations that could lead to significant gast costs and a potential denial of service. Impact The liquidity mining program in the Ambient DEX will...

FallBack Function might revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details The performFallbackCall function appears to be designed to send a message to the RootBridgeAgent using the lzReceive function. It includes the settlement nonce encoded as part of the message. Overall, the function seems fine for its intended purpose, but there...

Lack of validation in accrued index allows excess rewards claim.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Mapping tickTrackingIndexAccruedUpTo tracks the index up to which rewards have been accrued for a position. However, there is no validation that this index is incremented properly and stays in sync with tickTracking. An attacker could manipulate the...

The current vlCVX balance is not freezed, when withdrawal has been requested

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details After some deposits/withdrawals being made by users, the following edge case might occur: Let's say, n = totalLockedBalancePlusUnlockable, before iterating over the lockedBalances. t1 = lockedBalance0.unlockTime t2 =...

M-04 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The previously identified vulnerability of potential rounding issues during reward calculations has not been fully mitigated. The current strategy to keep remainders and use them in subsequent claimAndSyncRewards calls does not adequately address the iss...

Unsafe message encode and decode for cross chain message transfer and in execution process through axelar

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The cross chain message passing is done through the axelar gateway contracts. To pass the message, the message has to be formatted abi.encode and sent to destination chain from source chain. In destination chain, through gateway contract, the received...

Unchecked return value of low level call()/delegatecall()

Lines of code Vulnerability details The vulnerability related to an "Unchecked return value of low-level call/delegatecall" is a common and critical issue in Ethereum smart contracts. Let's break down this vulnerability and discuss its implications: 1. Low-Level Calls in Solidity: In Solidity,...

Non-standart ERC20 tokens are not supported

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue here is that some non-standard ERC20 tokens can have fee-on-transfer Proof of Concept The issue here is that some non-standard ERC20 tokens can have fee-on-transfer, so it could cause a problem that the protocol will lose tokens on each call...

Lack of ERC1155 Token Balance Check in flashloan Smart Contract Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: : The flashloan function in the code you provided does not check if the amount of ERC1155 tokens being flashed is available. This could lead to a situation where the function fails to complete because the caller does not have enough ERC1155 tokens ...

Tokens transferred with bridge can get lost if destination transaction can’t be executed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User could lost his tokens, if tx on destination chain will failrevert. There is no option to recover the tokens on source chain. Revert could be cause by function attachThreshold. This function finds the correspondence between the amount and threshhold...

Stealing extra mint fund by applying reentrancy attack on _execute with calling approve() again due to external call before crucial state update

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By applying reentrancy attack involving the function mintIfThresholdMet, an user can steal extra amount of mint fund. Proof of Concept The functions mintIfThresholdMet make external mint call prior to updating the txnHashToTransaction state. If the real...

M-08 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details The original issue M-08: Return value of low level call not checked, in scope for the mitigation review, was not acted upon, most likely overlooked during the fixing phase. Assessed type call/delegatecall --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors...

lack of address(0) check for oracle address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact no oracle no updated prices. Not sure what happens if try to call getPrice in this scenario, but IF it returns price of zero, then number of tokens from getRUSDYByShares will be zero for any amount of USDY shares... Proof of Concept Tools Used Recommende...

Lose due to rounding. Use more precise library for mathematical operations

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The mulDivDown function, assumed to be from FixedPointMathLib, is likely designed to multiply two numbers and then divide the result, rounding down any remainders. This rounding down can result in minor discrepancies when converting between assets and...

Zero Amount Check Missing in reLP function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If amount is 0, the reLP function will still execute all its operations, including external contract calls, which consume gas. This could lead to unnecessary gas costs for the caller. In a worst-case scenario, if this function is called repeatedly with...

RDPX price manipulation benefit for attacker via a Flashloan attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As the RdpxV2Core contract burns RDPX tokens, a malicious attacker can benefit from a price manipulation attack using a flashloan attack Proof of Concept The function bond in the RdpxV2Core contract is a primary function to enter the protocol and bond...

Calculating slippage from price oracle is not accurate

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact calculating slippage using oracle prices will lead to inaccurate slippage values , due to this swaps will fail or execute with higher slippage. Proof of Concept In curveSwap function of RdpxV2Core contract slippage is being calculated using oracles price...

A difference in the rDPX price between the oracle and DEXs used for trading can cause more slippage than expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol will experience much higher slippage than supposed to due to using the wrong price in calculating the amount after slippage. Proof of Concept The protocol executes swaps on Uniswap and Curve. The issue arises due to the protocol using its ow...

Overwriting rdpxAmount Without Checks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The decreaseAmount function, specifically the line bondsbondId.rdpxAmount = amount;. This vulnerability allows overwriting the rdpxAmount without any checks or backups, which can result in irreversible data loss. function decreaseAmount uint256 bondId,...