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 ...

Payment multiple functions do not check the caller

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Multiple functions in the Payment contract do not check the caller, for example, an attacker can directly call refundETH to transfer assets in the contract function refundETH external payable //@audit if addressthis.balance 0...

Precision loss in the invariant function can lead to loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can steal the funds without affecting the invariant. Proof of Concept We can say the function Pair.invariant is the heart of the protocol. All the malicious trades should be prevented by this function. Pair.sol 52: /// @inheritdoc IPair 53:...

Unprotected payable functions in Payment.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Payment.sol contract unwrapWETH and sweepToken functions are without any access control. They are public and and doesn't validate that it's being called by any permissioned account. The result is that anyone can steal tokens. Proof of Concept 25:...

Protocol fees can be withdrawn multiple times in Erc20Quest

Lines of code Vulnerability details The withdrawFee function present in the Erc20Quest contract can be used to withdraw protocol fees after a quest has ended, which are sent to the protocol fee recipient address: function withdrawFee public onlyAdminWithdrawAfterEnd...

withdrawRemainingTokens() in the Erc1155Quest withdraws all tokens and does not consider the amount of unclaimed tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The withdrawRemainingTokens function in the Erc1155Quest contract does not consider the amount of unclaimed tokens. When the owner calls the function when the quest has ended, all tokens belonging to the contract will be withdrawn. Any user who has not y...

Mitigation of M-07: Issue not mitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details The sponsor confirmed but disputed Medium severity, and did not provide any PRs addressing it, so the same issue remains in the new code. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Attacker can delay proposal rejection

Lines of code Vulnerability details The issue that is described in code-423n4/2022-12-tessera-findings24 was not mitigated and still applies like it is described there. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

[M] TimeswapV2LiquidityToken.sol#collect() Incorrect implementation causing collect always fail

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function collect in the provided code is supposed to transfer transaction fees from a liquidity token position to a recipient address. However, the function currently has an issue where the long0Fees, long1Fees, and shortFees variables are not...

Upgraded Q -> M from #229 [1674661441196]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 229 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Support for IERC165 interface id is missed Contract: Impact: Contract fails to support a valid interface which could lead to failure of genuine calls Steps: Observe the supportsInterface function...

Upgraded Q -> M from #113 [1674422768939]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 113 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: During handling the open fees, the tigAsset is distributed to gov. But, it is not approved before to be consumed by gov. So, the first user's transaction to initiate a market order, will fail. During handling the clo...

Deployer will deploy proxies that cannot be upgraded

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In contrast to the Test File, in which you're deploying the proxies directly, the setup from Deployer will keep the Proxy Admin to a zero value. Meaning nobody will be able to upgrade them after the deployment. See POC below to show that the admin slot i...

ERC4626Cloned.previewMint() causes malicious users to can exclusive access to vault

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact exclusive access to vault,Other users will not be able to mint Proof of Concept In the previewMint method, if the first user mint, no matter how many shares the user passes in, only 10e18 assets are needed function previewMintuint256 shares public view...

User can lose 10 ethers to Vault

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user or a contract that has a large allowance 10 ethers or max on an ERC4626Cloned based Vault that has not yet received any deposits, calls mint with 0 share argument, will have a 10 ethers of the asset transferred to the Vault with no way to recla...

Inconsistent min deposit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first transfer in a vault that is based on ERC4626Cloned produces different results depending on whether it is done via deposit or via mint. While first deposit produces a number of shares that is 1:1 with the asset, in the case of mint, the results...

exchangeRateDeltaLimit can be exceeded with overrideExchangeRate() and remain unpaused

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The CashManger has a safety feature that limits the maximum change in the exchange rate between epochs. in setMintExchangeRate it is checked that this limit is not exceeded but there is no check in overrideExchangeRate. Proof of Concept An epoch could ha...

Future Epoch Pending Redemption Balance Set Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setPendingRedemptionBalance function allows an admin to set the balance of a user's pending redemption for a specific epoch. However, it does not properly check that the epoch being set is in the past and not in the future. An attacker could...

Griefing attacks on handleOps and multiSend logic

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The handleOps function executes an array of UserOperation. If at least one user operation fails the whole transaction will revert. That means the error on one user ops will fully reverts the other executed ops. The multiSend function reverts if at...

[NAZ-M2] First ERC4626Upgradeable Deposit Exploit Can Break Share Calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC4626Upgradeable is an upgradeable version of Solmate's ERC4626 Token. Solmate's convertToShares function follow the formula: assetDepositAmount totalShareSupply / assetBalanceBeforeDeposit. The share price always return 1:1 with asset token. If...

The owner minipool count is not decreased in the case of a staking error

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a node operator creates a new pool or the recreateMinipool function is called the minipool count of the owner is increased by 1 and when the staking ends the multisig calls the recordStakingEnd function which will decrease the owner minipool count b...

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...

FIRST DEPOSIT CAN BREAK SHARE CALCULATIONS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Future depositors are forced to pay a huge value of assets to deposit. It is not practically possible for all users. This could directly affect the attrition of users towards this system. Proof of Concept A well-known attack vector for almost all...

Upgraded Q -> M from #32 [1671721748112]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 32 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: 2. StableVault deposits are limited to 18 decimals During deposit and withdraw to/from StableVault contract, it mints/burns the same amount of stable tokens with respect to decimals. The current implementation support...

SOLMATE SAFETRANSFER AND SAFETRANSFERFROM DOES NOT CHECK THE CODESIZE OF THE TOKEN ADDRESS, WHICH MAY LEAD TO FUND LOSS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reference from a previous Contrest : In uniswapV3SwapCallback and sendPaprFromAuctionFees the safetransfer and safetransferfrom doesn’t check the existence of code at the token address. This is a known issue while using solmate’s libraries. Hence this ma...

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...

Malicious user able to start auction to any NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any address can start an auction for an NFT, regardless of whether they are the actual owner of the NFT. This vulnerability could allow an attacker to start auctions for NFTs that they do not own, potentially leading to financial losses for the true owne...

Some NFTs could be possibly stuck and can not be withdrawn when removing the collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When adding a collateral, the protocol transfers the NFT from the user to the contract by calling ERC721's transferFrom, and when removing the collateral, safeTransferFrom is called to allow for onReceive hook to be triggered as intended by the protocol...

PaprController.sol: reservoir oracle price equal to 0 allows bypassing NFT liquidations

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When there is a reservoir oracle message with the price of the NFT equal to zero, the debt of a vault will be reset in the PaprController.purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT function when a NFT is bought in an auction. So the borrower can now withdraw all othe...

Upgraded Q -> M from #22 [1671528533640]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 22 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: NC-2 Return values of approve not checked --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

ERC20 TOKENS WITH DIFFERENT DECIMALS THAN 18 MAY BREAK THE LOGIC AND PROVIDE UNEXPECTED RESULTS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Note: Though it is mentioned that Rebase/fee-on-transfer tokens are not expected, however there exist other ERC20 tokens having different decimals than 18 Contracts LpToken and Pair performs calculations by using hardcoded value of decimals 18 1e18 for...

A malicious early user/attacker can manipulate the lpToken's pricePerShare to take an unfair share of future users' deposits

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A well known attack vector for almost all shares based liquidity pool contracts, where an early user can manipulate the price per share and profit from late users' deposits because of the precision loss caused by the rather large value of price per share...

Missing approval check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The lpToken.mint function is called with the msg.sender as the recipient, but there is no check to ensure that the sender has approved the contract to transfer the fractional tokens on their behalf. If the lptoken.mint function is missing a che...

POSSIBLE FRONTRUNNING ATTACK ON MINTING LONG/SHORT POSITIONS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact createMarket function in PrePOMarketFactory.sol contract creates a new PrePOMarket contract. Salt is used for creating the contract which is computed from createPairTokens function. Variables passed to this function are visible from anyone they are input...

User may be blocked from market withdrawal for extended period of time

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact WithdrawalHook::lastUserPeriodReset is global for all users, which means that each time that lastUserPeriodReset + userPeriodLength it'is able to block user from withdrawal', async = let previousResetTimestamp = await getLastTimestampethers.provider //...

A whale user is able to cause freeze of funds of other users by bypassing withdraw limit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In Collateral.sol, users may withdraw underlying tokens using withdraw. Importantly, the withdrawal must be approved by withdrawHook if set: function withdrawuint256 amount external override nonReentrant uint256 baseTokenAmount = amount...

TWA Price should be updated in addLiquidity, removeLiqudity and swap and migrateBinsUpStack and transferLiquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact TWA Price should be updated in addLiquidity, removeLiqudity and swap and transferLiquidity Proof of Concept I want to quote from the documentation: In Maverick, the AMM smart contract tracks the time-weighted average price TWAP with a configurable lookba...

Malicious feeReceiver or saleReceiver can steal the user's refund ETH by calling the buy function multiple times in LPDA

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the LPDA contract, the fee is transfered to feeReceiver and the totalSale to saleReceiver when newId == temp.finalId, meaning that the amount of tokens that were minted has been reached. However, the call to the internal end function only emits an eve...

Unsafe casting from uint256 to uint8 cause wrong index of asset and feeder in NFTFloorOracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In NFTFloorPrice, it has a set of feeders and a set of assets. Feeders will set price for assets. Of coursers, with the growing NFT space, number of assets collection could be much more than 256 and because Paraspace uses median price from keepers so...

[ZZ-001] PARENT_CANNOT_CONTROL and CANNOT_CREATE_SUBDOMAIN fuses can be bypassed

Severity: High Status: Has been reported to and comfirmed by Jeff ENS team Report Time: 11/28/2022 12:31 AM EST Description The fuse constraints can be violated by a malicious owner of the parent node i.e., the hacker. There are two specific consequences the hacker can cause. Suppose the subnode...

Reentranxcy in executeCalls()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract first checks that the message sender is authorized and then marks the provided nonce as executed before calling the executeCalls function in CallLib. However, if CallLib.executeCalls calls back into this contract, the executeCalls function...

NameWrapper: expired names behave unwrapped

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact expired Names are supposed to be unregistered, but it behaves like unwrapped parent with CANNOTCREATESUBDOMAIN fuse can "create" again an expired name parent can ENS.setSubdomainOwner before burning CANNOTCREATESUBDOMAIN to be able to use the subdomain...

NameWrapper: one can renew to DoS a Name

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone with enough eth can make a name impossible to be used anymore Proof of Concept Below is a snippet of the proof of concept. The whole code can be found in this gist. And how to run test is in the comment in the gist. This proof of concept...

Theft of ETH that was not used for successful execution of orders in non-atomic execution

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There is an execute function in LooksRareAggregator contract. It refunds any ETH that was unused for example that left due to the unsuccessful execution of an order at the end of its execution flow: returnETHIfAnyoriginator; returnETHIfAny function ...

1) THERE IS CONFLICT IN REQUIRE STATMENT. IN finalizeDeposit FUNCTION CHECKS require (msg.sender == l1Bridge, "mq"). IN bridgeMint FUNCTION IMPLEMENTATIONS onlyBridge Modifier CHECKS require(msg.sender == l2Bridge).

Lines of code Vulnerability details 1. Impact Let assume if we calling bridgeMint from finalizeDeposit function the msg.sender is l1bridge . if the msg.sender is not l1bridge can't run the finalizeDeposit but as per bridgeMint the msg.sender should be l2bridge. So it will cause the conflict . the...

Bid can be cancelled after being finalized

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The SizeSealed contract's cancelBid function can be called after auction has been finalized, thereby allowing the bidder to withdraw their quoteToken after bid is finalized This is possible by bypassing the if a.data.lowestQuote != typeuint128.max ||...

Reentrancy in createAuction() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens missing return values and don't fail in case of an unsuccessful transfer. Also, ERC777 tokens could call the tokens receivers during the transfer. If baseToken would be such a token that combines both properties - this could lead to a...

SizeSealed.withdraw will revert on mulDivDown if a.data.lowest is the value zero, which can prevent withdraws for an auction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The call to mulDivDown on L377 will revert if the third argument denominador is the value zero. See Solmate implementation. It's possible for a.data.lowestBase to receive the value zero, which will prevent the transfers from L381 and L384. Impa...

Cross-chain replay attacks are possible with create2()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Mistakes made on one chain can be re-applied to a new chain There is no chain.id in the create2 function data If a user does create2 using the wrong network, an attacker can replay the action on the correct chain, and steal the funds a-la the wintermute...

Hacker can front-run the L2 ERC20 token deployment.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact hacker can front-run the L2 ERC20 token deployment to block L2 ERC20 token finalizeDeposit Proof of Concept I intend to prove this piece of code is front-runnable by hacker: /// @notice Finalize the deposit and mint funds /// @param l1Sender The account...

Reuse of previous voting difference in extendPledge() charges too much fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In Warden Pledge, creators can extend the life span of an existing pledge using extendPledge. Here's the implementation: uint256 addedDuration = newEndTimestamp - oldEndTimestamp; ifaddedDuration maxTotalRewardAmount revert...