Potential for reentrancy on USDMPegRecovery.sol:withdraw()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Re-entrancy Proof of Concept File: USDMPegRecovery.sol 110: function withdrawLiquidity calldata withdrawal external 111: Liquidity memory total = totalLiquidity; 112: Liquidity memory user = userLiquiditymsg.sender; 113: ifwithdrawal.usdm 0 114:...

TimeswapPair.sol#borrow() Improper implementation allows attacker to increase pool.state.z to a large value

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details In the current implementation, borrow takes a user input value of zIncrease, while the actual collateral asset transferred in is calculated at L319, the state of pool.state.z still increased by the value of the user's input at L332. Even though a large number...

Dashboard is not working , lend positiona are still loading, the same is for Lend button, Lend Amount to lend is not refresjing

Handle 0v3rf10w 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 --- The...

ERC20 return values not checked (2)

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The ERC20.transfer, ERC20.transferFrom, ERC20.approve functions return a boolean value indicating success. This parameter needs to be checked for success. Also, some tokens like USDT don't correctly implement the EIP20 standard and their transfer/transferFrom...

Council veto protection does not work

Handle TomFrenchBlockchain Vulnerability details Impact Council can veto proposals to remove them to remain in power. Proof of Concept The Vader governance contract has the concept of a "council" which can unilaterally accept or reject a proposal. To prevent a malicious council preventing itself...

Basket.sol#auctionBurn calculates ibRatio wrong

Handle 0x0x0x Vulnerability details The function is implemented as follows: function auctionBurnuint256 amount onlyAuction nonReentrant external override uint256 startSupply = totalSupply; handleFeesstartSupply; burnmsg.sender, amount; uint256 newIbRatio = ibRatio startSupply / startSupply -...

Possible price manipulation while adding liquidity to uniV3

Handle 0x421f Vulnerability details Right now if we see the code there are no checks before liq being added to check if pool is manipulated. Hence there rises possibility of sandwich attack vector here, more so with concentrated liq imo Could be done with flash loan or with own tokens Attack woul...

Governor can steal funds from vaults

Handle 0x0x0x Vulnerability details reclaimTokens function is as follows function reclaimTokensaddress to, address memory tokens external nonReentrant requirenft 0, ExceptionsLibrary.INITIALIZATION; IProtocolGovernance governance = vaultGovernance.internalParams.protocolGovernance; bool...

Tokens can be stolen when depositToken == rewardToken

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The Streaming contract allows the deposit and reward tokens to be the same token. I believe this is intended, think Sushi reward on Sushi as is the case with xSushi. The reward and deposit balances are also correctly tracked independently in depositTokenAmount...

Locke.sol:Stream - possible DOS on arbitraryCall

Handle ScopeLift Vulnerability details Impact If there's an airdrop that arbitraryCall would like to call, it could be DOSed by first calling createIncentive with the airdropped token, then backrunning calls to claimIncentive with calls to createIncentive. Proof of Concept Tools Used Recommended...

_calculateMaltRequiredForExit makes wrong calculations

Handle 0x0x0x Vulnerability details Proof of concept calculateMaltRequiredForExit calculates the quantity of malts returned. uint256 maltQuantity = userMaltPurchased.mulamount.divuserCommitment; uint256 fullReturn = maltQuantity.mulcurrentPrice / pegPrice; userMaltPurchased / userCommitment...

AddLiquidity allows sandwich attacks on direct use within hard coded 5% slippage tolerance

Handle hyh Vulnerability details Impact Liquidity provision can happen at a manipulated price which leads to immediate loss for liquidity provider i.e. IL happens right after liquidity provision in this case. This yields direct loss for an account owner, for example schematically: 0. Suppose...

Approvals not cleared after key transfer

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The locks implement three different approval types, see onlyKeyManagerOrApproved for an overview: key manager map keyManagerOf single-person approvals map approved. Cleared by clearApproval or setKeyManagerOf operator approvals map managerToOperatorApproved Th...

Malicious user can DOS lock by falsely reaching maxNumberOfKeys using shareKey

Handle kenzo Vulnerability details A malicious user can call shareKey repeatedly, transferring miniscule amounts of his key to different accounts, thereby minting new keys until maxNumberOfKeys is reached. Impact Malicious user can grief and make lock purchasing become disabled. Proof of Concept ...

Unclear TwapOracle.consult algorithm

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The TWAPOracle.consult function is unclear to the auditor. It seems to iterate through all registered pairs that share the token parameter USDV or VADER and then sums up the foreign token pair per token price. And divides this sum sumNative by the summed-up US...

Trades where toToken is feeOnTransferToken might send user less tokens than finalAmountMin

Handle kenzo Vulnerability details Slingshot's executeTrades checks that the trade result amount to be sent to the user is bigger than finalAmountMin, and after that sends the user the amount. But if the token charges fee on transfer, the final transfer to the user will decrease the amount the us...

Admin can abuse grantSlingshot and steal user funds

Handle kenzo Vulnerability details After user has .approved ApprovalHandler, admin can grantSlingshot himself, and then call ApprovalHandler.transferFrom with parameters that will transfer all tokens to himself before the user calls Slingshot's executeTrades. Although this vulnerability requires ...

transferFrom amount may exceed allowance

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details function transferFromaddress sender, address recipient, uint256 amount public virtual override returns bool /// @dev the balances mapping represents the underlying ibBTC shares "non-rebased balances" /// @dev the naming confusion is due to maintaining origina...

transfer() is not recommended for sending ETH

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details Since the introduction of transfer, it has typically been recommended by the security community because it helps guard against reentrancy attacks. This guidance made sense under the assumption that gas costs wouldn’t change. It's now recommended that transfer...

ConcentratedLiquidityPoolManager.sol#claimReward() and reclaimIncentive() will fail when incentive.token is token0 or token1

Handle WatchPug Vulnerability details In ConcentratedLiquidityPosition.collect, balances of token0 and token1 in bento will be used to pay the fees. uint256 balance0 = bento.balanceOftoken0, addressthis; uint256 balance1 = bento.balanceOftoken1, addressthis; if balance0 newBalance0 token0amount =...

Incorrect data location specifier can be abused to cause DoS and fund loss

Handle 0xRajeev Vulnerability details Impact The withdrawBounty loops through the bounties array looking for active bounties and transferring amounts from active ones. However, the data location specifier used for bounty is memory which makes a copy of the bounties array member instead of a...

use of transfer() instead of call() to send eth

Handle JMukesh Vulnerability details Impact Use of transfer might render ETH impossible to withdraw becuase after istanbul hardfork , there is increases in the gas cost of the SLOAD operation and therefore breaks some existing smart contracts.Those contracts will break because their fallback...

PostAuctionLauncher's liquidity provision can be exploited

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The PostAuctionLauncher.finalize function takes the raised payment token amounts and uses previously provided auction token amounts to provide liquidity to a Sushiswap pool after an auction has successfully been finalized. It provides this liquidity at a...

Possibility to Stake Twice

Handle verifyfirst Vulnerability details Impact Potential for some users to double-stake their Yaxis. Proof of Concept // SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT pragma solidity 0.6.12; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol"; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/SafeERC20.sol"; // yAx...

Vault treats all tokens exactly the same that creates (huge) arbitrage opportunities.

Handle jonah1005 Vulnerability details Impact The v3 vault treats all valid tokens exactly the same. Depositing 1M DAI would get the same share as depositing 1M USDT. User can withdraw their share in another token. Though there's withdrawalProtectionFee 0.1 percent, the vault is still a no slippa...

Rewards accumaulated can stay constant and oftern not increment

Handle moose-code Vulnerability details Impact rewardsPerToken.accumulated can stay constant while rewardsPerToken.lastUpdated is continually updated, leading to no actual rewards being distributed. I.e. No rewards accumulate. Proof of Concept Line 115, rewardsPerToken.accumulated could stay...

CompositeMultiOracle returns wrong decimals for prices?

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details The CompositeMultiOracle.peek/get functions seem to return wrong prices. It's unclear what decimals source.decimals refers to in this case. Does it refer to source.source token decimals? It chains the price arguments through peek function calls and a single...

Router.removeLiquidityExact(uint256,address) has unchecked transfers

Handle heiho1 Vulnerability details Impact Router.removeLiquidityExactuint256,address line 114 does not check the boolean return of a token transfer. This is a brittle implementation because it relies on the boolean return value being hard-coded to true. Tokens may not revert in case of failure a...

safeTransferFrom in TransferHelper is not safeTransferFrom

Handle jonah1005 Vulnerability details Impact A non standard erc20 token would always raise error when calling safeTransferFrom. If a user creates a USDT/DAI pool and deposit into the pool he would find out there's never a counterpart deposit. Proof of Concept TransferHelper does not uses SafeERC...

how to protect for weird erc20 tokens

Handle gpersoon Vulnerability details Impact The protocol only works as expected when the ERC20 tokens are well behaved. If rebasing tokens or malicious token contracts are used then unexpected results can happen. I don't see any code to restrict the tokens or verify the tokens. Proof of Concept...

Transactions nearing block.gaslimit may cause issues

Handle hrkrshnn Vulnerability details transactions nearing block.gaslimit may cause issues A general problem with schemes that require multiple steps and whose inputs are dynamically typed is that: a user may be able to "commit" something, but never "execute" it because the "execute" transaction...

Unchecked return value from ERC20

Handle cmichel Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details The ERC20.transfer and ERC20.transferFrom functions return a boolean value indicating success. This parameter needs to be checked for success. According to the standard the return value must be checked for true, otherwise the transfer wil...

Unchecked ERC20 transfers can cause lock up

Handle axic Vulnerability details Impact Some major tokens went live before ERC20 was finalised, resulting in a discrepancy whether the transfer functions a should return a boolean or b revert/fail on error. The current best practice is that they should revert, but return “true” on success...

Unhandled return value of transferFrom in timeLockERC20() could lead to fund loss for recipients

Handle 0xRajeev Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 implementations are not always consistent. Some implementations of transfer and transferFrom could return ‘false’ on failure instead of reverting. It is safer to wrap such calls into require statements or use safe wrapper functions implementing...

A malicious receiver can cause another receiver to lose out on distributed fees by returning false for tokensReceived when receiveRewards is called on their receiver contract.

Handle janbro Vulnerability details Summary A malicious receiver can cause another receiver to lose out on distributed fees by returning false for tokensReceived when receiveRewards is called on their receiver contract. Risk Rating Medium Vulnerability Details A malicious receiver can cause anoth...

Missing overflow check in flashLoan

Handle @cmichelio Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details ERC20FlashMintUpgradeable.flashLoan does not check for an overflow when adding the fees to the flashloan amount. The functionality might have been copied from but this one already has overflow checks as it uses solidity 0.8.0. Impact...

Attacker can call update_market frequently to halt the increase of secRewardsPerShare

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can call updatemarket frequently to halt the increase of secRewardsPerShare. Proof of Concept market.secRewardsPerShare += uint128blockDelta 1e18 / marketSupply; // TODO: Scaling Suppose marketSupply is 1e21, then the attacker can call...

NO access control in decreaseAllowance and increaseAllowance

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. NO access control in decreaseAllowance and increaseAllowance.Anyone can call this function and increase or decrease the allowlance. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub...

Loss of Funds for Users Due to Token Purchase after Maximum Supply

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary When the token's total supply reaches its maximum, users lose funds when attempting to buy tokens, as the transaction completes without minting new tokens. Vulnerability Details To engage in the voting system, users must acquire tokens directly from the...

_verifyVoteSignature wrong implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. voteHash = keccak256abi.encodeVOTETYPEHASH, from, pieceIds, noncesfrom++, deadline; here we are using noncesfrom++ for calculating voteHash but different from address can have the same noncesfrom++...

Users can avoid liquidation by splitting their positions into smaller ones

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Bad debt creation, as the total sum of positions could yield a signicant underwater position, but they would likely not be liquidated as it wouldn't compensate liquidators. Proof of Concept A recent, random transaction on Mantle shows a gas fee of 0.47...

Liquidator can get higher rate for liquidation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept When position is unhealthy then it can be liquidated. In order to incentivize someone to liquidate positions they receive some extra amount of collateral. This incentive percentage is calculated inside...

The creator does not receive additional ether - it accumulates on the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In some cases, the ERC20TokenEmitter contract may accumulate residual ether that was not sent to the creator. The contract does not have a function to pick up the remaining ether. When a user wants to buy tokens, he sends ether to the...

voteForManyWithSig functions in CultureIndex are open to replay attacks if fails.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If vote fails or reverts for any reason, the nonce in verifyVoteSignature doesn't increment. This leads to the same vote tx being replayed by anyone. Proof of Concept A user submits a vote via voteForManyWithSig, triggering verifyVoteSignature for...

collectLiquidity() Lack of can specify recipient leads to inability to retrieve token1 after entering the blacklist of token0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details LP has only one way to retrieve token, first decreaseLiquidity, then retrieve through the collectLiquidity method. collectLiquidity only has one parameter, tokenId. function collectLiquidity uint256 tokenId external override nonReentrant...

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...

_safeMint() should be used rather than _mint() wherever possible

Lines of code 139, 178, 204 Vulnerability details mint is discouraged in favor of safeMint which ensures that the recipient is either an EOA or implements IERC721Receiver. Both OpenZeppelin and solmate have versions of this function. In the cases below, mint does not call...

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...

Using block.timestamp as the deadline/expiry invites MEV

Lines of code 307 Vulnerability details Passing block.timestamp as the expiry/deadline of an operation does not mean "require immediate execution" - it means "whatever block this transaction appears in, I'm comfortable with that block's timestamp". Providing this value means that a malicious mine...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...