_returnETHIfAny() can silently fail, leading to an originator not getting the expected refund

Lines of code Vulnerability details The execute function refunds the unused ETH back to the originator through returnETHIfAny. This internal function uses a low-level call to transfer the ETH. The issue is that the return value of the call is not checked. As per the Solidity documentation...

Upgraded Q -> M from #43 [1668210521611]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 43 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Q-02 - Huge trust assumption in recoverErc20 Reward tokens are transferred into this contract when a pledge is created. The comment notes " Recovers ERC2O tokens sent by mistake to the contract", but this function can...

Solmate safetransfer and safetransferfrom doesnot check the codesize of the token address, which may lead to fund loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In bid function, the safetransferfrom function doesn't check the existence of code at the token address. This is a known issue while using solmate's libraries. Hence this may lead to miscalculation of funds and may lead to loss of funds , because if...

Some bidders can withdraw would claim moreof the baseToken when auction CliffPercent value is 1

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If an auction is created with a.timings.cliffPercent set to 1 , then during withdrawal of baseTokens after auction ends, the some bidders to withdraw would claim more tokens than others of the baseToken amounts. Proof of Concept 1. Auction A is created...

seller can change lowestBaseand lowestQuote and the seller can make it diffrent values causing a dos or loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When I a seller finalizes the auction they change the lowestQuote and lowestBase.When users withdraw from the auction after the auction is finalized. QuoteBought is calculated with the new amounts which can cause dos or refund their leftover quote amount...

Denial of service when baseAmount is equal to zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description There is a finalize function in the SizeSealed smart contract. The function traverses the array of the bids sorted by price descending. On each iteration, it calculates the quotePerBase. When this variable is calculated, the...

Protocol won’t work with rebasing tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Some tokens may make arbitrary balance modifications outside of transfers e.g. Ampleforth style rebasing tokens, Compound style airdrops of governance tokens, mintable / burnable tokens. If such a token as used, since in the protocol we cache t...

A total of 3 risks: one with imperfect concurrency judgment logic, one with unrobust business logic, and one with unreasonable timestamp settings

Lines of code Vulnerability details RISK 1: When creating an auction, if the exact same token is transferred to the contract in a very short period of time, it will cause one of the auctions to fail to be created. is caused by the following statement: if balanceAfterTransfer - balanceBeforeTransf...

reentrancyGuardInitializer modifier used on constructor and Initialize functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. In L1EthBridge.sol there are two places where the reentrancyGuardInitializer modifier is used. It's found on both the constructor function and also on the initialize function. This is a problem because...

Oracle's getPrice() returns the wrong price in certain combinations of oracle feed and token decimals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The oracle's getPrice returns a price that is off by several orders of magnitued depending of the combination of decimals for the Chainlink's pricefeed and underlaying token's pricefeed Actually it based on the decimals set when adding the feed tot he...

If a market with a collateral that has feedDecimals + tokenDecimals > 36 is added it won’t be functional

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Chainlink price feeds usually have 18 decimals, but this is not guaranteed. Also tokens usually have 18 decimals or less but this is also not the case for 100% of widely used tokens YAM-v2 has 24. So the normal use case is when both the feed an...

Wrong reward calculation when reward token's decimals are different than 18

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a user creates a pledge, she can specify the maximum amount of the Total Rewards and the maximum amount of fee amount she is willing to spend. By using the rewardPerVote, the vars.votesDifference and the vars.duration the smart contract calculates...

Pledge creator can extend pledge without paying in edge cases.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Pledge creator can extend pledge without paying in edge cases. Proof of Concept When pledge creators wants to extend their pledges, they must transfer an additional reward amount and fee: uint256 totalRewardAmount = pledgeParams.rewardPerVote...

Interference exploit among multiple pledges.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. There is no guarantee that each server has only one pledge, when such scenario appears, vars.votesDifference will be calculated incorrectly and all other calculations will be wrong. Proof of Concept...

Public Detectors arbitrary send erc20

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact this flaw allows user B to steal the tokens approved by user A Proof of Concept Exploit Scenario: function aaddress from, address to, uint256 amount public erc20.transferFromfrom, to, am; Alice approves this contract to spend her ERC20 tokens. Bob can ca...

setRoyalties can lead to royalties set to greater than 100%, breaking royalty functionality

Lines of code Vulnerability details enforcer/PA1D can be used by NFT smart contracts to provide royalty info. The owner can call setRoyalties to set the royalties for a specific token id, or the default royalty of the collection. Marketplaces implementing EIP-2981 can then use royaltyInfo to get...

Operator is not randomly selected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Operator is not selected randomly, but entirely determined by the number of operators in pod. Proof of Concept The pod is selected by taking a number random modulo the number of pods Np. But then the operator is selected by taking the modulo of the same...

_payoutEth() gas computation can make call revert even if balance is sufficient

Lines of code Vulnerability details Payout recipients can call getEthPayout to transfer the ETH balance of the contract to all payout recipients. This function makes an internal call to payoutEth, which computes the gasCost, then proceeds to check balance - gasCost 10000 before sending the result...

Incorrect usage of try/catch block

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description There is a function getBridgeOutRequestPayload in HolographBridge contract. It has the following: / @dev the revertedBridgeOutRequest function is wrapped into a try/catch function / try this.revertedBridgeOutRequestmsg.sender,...

Missing input validation can lead to accidental burning of tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some token transfers do not check that the receiving address is not the zero address. This can lead to an unintended burning of tokens. Proof of Concept 1. Assume Alice uses a web3 frontend to interact with a DAI/USDT pool. 2. Alice wants to swap DAI for...

TokenHelper.sol#L40 : safeTransfer will revert due to insufficient gas.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact I am adding as high issue since most of the calling is done using the safeTransfer TokenHelper.solL40 : safeTransfer will revert due to insufficient gas. All the fuctions that are using the safeTransfer could fail due to insufficient gas. I see the...

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...

After proposed 0.8.0 upgrade kicks in, L2 finalizeInboundTransfer might not work.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description L2GraphTokenGateway uses the onlyL1Counterpart modifier to make sure finalizeInboundTransfer is only called from L1GraphTokenGateway. Its implementation is: modifier onlyL1Counterpart require msg.sender ==...

Using ifAdminOrPendingImpl modifier to forcefully interact with implementation contracts via _fallback() call.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The modifier ifAdminOrPendingImpl allows internal delegation to the implementation contract if caller is not admin by calling the fallback function which delegates the current call to implementation. This allows a user who is not admin to call to make a...

Lack of a contract existence check may lead to undefined behavior

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Low-level calls call/delegatecall/staticcall return true even if the account called is non-existent per EVM design. Solidity documentation warns: “The low-level functions call, delegatecall and staticcall return true as their first return value if the...

The arithmetic operator can overflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is possible to cause an integer overflow or underflow in the arithmetic operation. Proof of Concept Contract: GraphProxyAdmin Function name: getProxyPendingImplementationaddress PC address: 1898 Estimated Gas Usage: 1387 - 36513 In file:...

_executeTokenTransfer() can silently fail for malicious ERC721 implementations.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact execute calls executeTokenTransfer to perform the NFT transfer from seller to buyer. The function assumes correct safeTransferFrom functionality and does not check balances. In case of malicious - or poorly designed pausable ERC721 implementations, this...

Incorrect implementation of the MerkleVerifier.sol library

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The MerkleVerifier results in an incorrect verification of the Merkle Tree. Description Using a simple test case from and deploying the contracts with MerkleVerifier.sol. We can see that the results differs when attempting to verify the Merkle Tree. Test...

Buyers will lose an amount of their funds for only one ERC115 token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By using StandardPolicyERC1155.sol as a matchingPolicy for the order. The buyer will transfer an amount of funds ETH or WETH for 2 or more tokens, but he will receive only 1 token. Proof of Concept in case the buyer has set Input.Order.amount 1. Let’s sa...

ERC20 return values not checked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Some tokens like USDT don't correctly implement the EIP20 standard and their transfer/transferFrom function return void instead of a success boolean. Calling these functions with the correct EIP20 function signatures will always revert...

Gobbler Merkle tree vulnerable to second preimage attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Merkle tree is vulnerable to a second preimage attack due to the fact that there is no prefix to distinguish between leaves an intermediate nodes Proof of Concept There are no prefixes added to the values in MerkleProofLib and none included in what's...

Low level call returns true if the address doesn't exist

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As written in the solidity documentation, the low-level function call returns true as its first return value if the address called is non-existent, as part of the design of the EVM. Address existence must be checked prior to calling if needed. Since the...

Risk of ETH funds Rug Pull in the moveWithheldETH and recoverEther functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the frxETHMinter contract both the owner and governance timelock have the power to call the functions moveWithheldETH and recoverEther, those functions allow the transfer of the ETH from frxETHMinter to the owner or a given account, this means that th...

Overflow in _baseVestedAmount() prevents claims to be retrieved

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Rewards of high value will be unable to be withdrawn since claimableAmount will revert. Proof of Concept In line 176, if we assume there's a claim of a token with 18 decimals and a vesting of 1 year, which is a realistic vesting period that can be observ...

Rebasing tokens can ruin the claiming

Lines of code Vulnerability details Rebasing tokens has the ability to use all the funds before all the recipients fulfilled their vestings. This can happen as the system records balance in nominals terms, while it can be rebased thereafter, which will create a discrepancy with system's accountin...

Employee can be unable to withdraw claimable amount that she or he deserves after admin revokes her or his claim

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When an employee has an active claim, this employee can call the following withdraw function to withdraw the claimable amount that she or he is entitled to, which would increase her or his claim's amountWithdrawn. Because the employee is free to call...

Mistakenly use of arithmetic operation can lead to loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mistakenly use of arithmetic operation can lead to loss Description Calculating the values can somewhat correct to what you need but this is a great mistake of calculation which should be overcomed .Now why should this be overcomed? Since in Solidity, the order...

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...

Upgraded Q -> M from 238 [1663858577471]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 238 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: 2. call should be used instead of transfer on an address payable Sometimes this kind of issue is considered as Medium risk. The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address will inevitably make the...

If noone deposit in one Vault, assets deposited to the other Vault will be locked.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In each Vault epoch, idFinalTVL and idClaimTVL values is only set when someone call triggerDepeg or triggerEndEpoch from Controller. In case of depeg, we will swap assets of hedge and risk Vault. But if one Vault has noone deposited, idFinalTVL will be...

Problems with PegOracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are at least a few problems with the PegOracle. I am grouping them into one submission because some of them are not that significant but the last one I believe deserves a higher severity. 1. Function latestRoundData queries getOracle2Price but...

Unsafe ERC721 operations

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is recommended to use safeTransfer and safeTransferFrom when transferring ERC721 and ERC20 token Tools Used Manual audit Recommended Mitigation Steps Use the safeTransfer and safeTransferFrom functions to transfer ERC721 and ERC20 tokens --- The text...

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...

Unending and Eventually Futile TRIBE Redemption

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact TRIBE holders can redeem for pro rata share of remaining DAO controlled assets according to TIP-121 proposal. In the light of this, users would rush into redeeming their TRIBE before the balances of each tokensReceived held on this contract run out...

No validation on wcanto may lead into lock deposit because of arbitrary address in deposit call

Lines of code Vulnerability details No validation on wcanto may lead into lock deposit because of arbitrary address in deposit call Impact Address wcanto is not being validated. In case of wrong deployment, function swapExactCANTOForTokens will lock ether in a wrong contract. Consideration...

USER CAN BLOCK GOVERNANCE VOTING BY SUBMITTING MULTIPLE PROPOSALS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A user can submit multiple proposals and then endorse each one of them to be able to activate them, and because the Governance contract allow only one active proposal, this user will be able to always activate his proposals and thus not allowing any othe...

The _movingAverage always have the same value as _movingAverage + (currentPrice / numObs)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact On updateMovingAverage the calculate new moving average is always movingAverage == movingAverage + currentPrice / numObs Proof of Concept 1- keeper invoke beat on Heart.sol 2- this PRICE.updateMovingAverage; to updating the moving average on the Price...

Swap at the lower cushion is impossible due to non approved withdrawal. Wrong implementation can cause free swaps.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently it is not clear how the swap user is approved for withdrawing from treasury. Depending on implementation, user could swap without spending any tokens, due to approval mechanism in the TRSRY module. Description In the swap function it should be...

Governance functions relies on the proposal Id which says nothing about the proposal content

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are submitProposal/endorseProposal/activateProposal functions on the Governance smart contract. The functions accept the proposed, which does not contain any information about the proposal. As a result, transactions of users can be front-ran. Proof...

Div by 0 can block functions such as updateMovingAverage

Lines of code Vulnerability details Prevent div by 0 Impact On several locations in the code precautions are taken not to divide by 0, because this will revert the code. However on some locations this isn’t done. All this reverts can be caused by state variables assigned to 0 or with length 0, th...