Possiblity of storage collision

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a possibility of storage collision, when you upgrade the implementation contract in the . This could happen because the storage in the smart contract is stored the storage value from the left to the right, and if you add a new var to the storage...

Upgraded G -> 3 from #31 [1673740310963]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 31 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: gegae --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

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...

Borrowers don’t need to run the risk of being liquidated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Borrowers are able to borrow Papr, swap it for another asset in Uniswap without ever having to pay their debt because they can remove their collateral without paying their debt. Ultimately leading to free assets at the cost of others. Proof of Concept As...

fundingRate formula and _multiplier()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The formula used formultiplier will not work as expected. The target price update will be inaccurate and all the borrow/repay/liquidation functions will use the inaccurate target price. The impacts might be: Target price and mark price track will not wor...

Reentrancy issue #1: Functions buy() and add() are vulnerable to reentrancy attack through tokensToSend() hook of ERC777

Lines of code Vulnerability details It is important to be aware that I have reported two reentrancy bugs. Each of these have different ways of being activated and can be found in separate functions. Impact All calculations done in Caviar Pair are using token balance directly. For example, when...

Priority queue min accounting breaks when nodes are split in two

Lines of code Vulnerability details The README states If two users place bids at the same price but with different quantities, the queue will pull from the bid with a higher quantity first, but the data-structure used for implementing this logic, is not used properly and essentially has its data...

Groupbuy: _verifyUnsuccessfulState and _verifySuccessfulState both can return true when block.timestamp == pool.terminationPeriod

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The functions verifyUnsuccessfulState and verifySuccessfulState should always have a differing behavior with regards to reversion, i.e. when one does not revert, the other should revert. In one condition, this is not true. Namely, when we have pool.succe...

GovNFT contract's owner can stop Governance NFT holders from receiving more rewards from trades' DAO fees, and such reward amounts can remain in Trading contract without belonging to anyone

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact According to , "Profits from trading fees are paid out to Governance NFT holders in real-time...Rewards are paid out in Tigris stablecoins." However, for some legitimate reasons, such as if the corresponding Tigris stablecoin has a bug, or if the owner o...

Not enough margin pulled or burned from user when adding to a position

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When adding to a position, the amount of margin pulled from the user is not as much as it should be, which leaks value from the protocol and lowering the collateralization ratio of tigAsset. Proof of Concept In Trading.addToPosition the handleDeposit...

LP Rewards can be increased infinitely by a malicious liquidity provider

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LP Rewards can be increased infinitely by a malicious liquidity provider Proof of Concept A Bond NFT holder can claim pending rewards from a bond using the function Lock.claim. function claim uint256 id public returns address claimGovFees; uint amount,...

depositAndTrade::exactInputSingleParams the possible return values not checked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The return values ​​from collateral.deposit and collateral.transferFrom are not used. This means that the values ​​returned by those functions will not be stored or used in the code. The swapRouter.exactInputSingle function also likely returns no value, ...

Ability to redeem excess collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details redeem of PrePOMarket.sol redeems long and short tokens in exchange for collateral tokens. Long and short tokens are default ERC20 tokens with 18 decimals, while the collateral ERC20 token uses the decimals of the underlying base token. Th...

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...

Pool.sol : Lack of slippage protection for swap

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to lack of slippage protection, user may suffer and incur loss of func in adverse condition. Proof of Concept Swap function is used to swap one toke for another token. While the swap function has check to ensure for exactOutput, but it does not have...

Owner can rug PrePOMarket using re-initialized finalLongPayout.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In PrePOMarket.sol, the finalLongPayout represents the finalized value of a single long token in the market. It is settled post ICO / IPO according to predetermined rules. The issue is that this value may be re-initialized as many times as owner...

Re-entrancy issue when executing safeTransfer in sweepToken function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the sweepToken function, we don't have a re-Entrancy check which will introduce the token lost by calling sweepToken multiple times during one request. Proof of Concept We don't have any check for the token and the token itself may call back into the...

Attacker can drain pool using executeBuyWithCredit with malicious marketplace payload.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Paraspace supports leveraged purchases of NFTs through PoolMarketplace entry points. User calls buyWithCredit with marketplace, calldata to be sent to marketplace, and how many tokens to borrow. function buyWithCredit bytes32 marketplaceId, bytes...

Artist will never get their payout for their NFT in FixedPrice and OpenEdition

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no logic for transferring Ether that artist gain from their NFT sales in both FixedPrice and OpenEdition contracts. For these 2 contracts there is only logic for transferring 5% fee to the protocol. Therefore, artist will gain nothing from selli...

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...

Fallback oracle is unusable when primary oracle is not updated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Paraspace implemented their own Oracle wrapper in ParaSpaceOracle.sol. The important function getAssetPrice is used by many logic functions like health check. function getAssetPriceaddress asset public view override returns uint256 if asset ==...

Oracle will become invalid much faster than intended on non-mainnet chains

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description NFTFloorOracle is in charge of answering price queries for ERC721 assets. EXPIRATIONPERIOD constant is the max amount of blocks allowed to have passed for the reading to be considered up to date: uint256 diffBlock = currentBlock - priceInfo.updatedA...

Use of payable.transfer() may lock user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of payable.transfer is heavily frowned upon because it can lead to the locking of funds. The transfer call requires that the recipient has a payable callback, only provides 2300 gas for its operation. This means the following cases can cause the...

Relayed calls in EthereumToArbitrumRelayer can be replayed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A relayed call can be processed multiple times allowing somebody to execute the user's call multiple times. The bridge allows arbitrary calls to contracts. Depending on the nature of the call, this could result in a loss of funds for the user. Proof of...

[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...

incorrect commend and/or rounding issues in AutoPxGmx and AutoPxGlp

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The comments on the affected lines state previewWithdraw will round up. However, the implementation, an inner call to convertToShares is made, which actually calls mulDivDown. From further inspection, this pair of functions withdraw, previewWithdraw as...

Incentive fund loss when calling claim() in AutoPxGlp/PxGmxRewards because it calls this.compound(,,true) which would transfer incentive to contract itself and those funds won't be calculated as rewards or fee and won't be accessible to withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function claim in PxGmxReward contract is used for claiming available pxGMX rewards of a user. but this function calls IAutoPxGlpaddressthis.compound1, 1, true; to harvest new rewards and stake them to compound rewards. but this call is external call and...

Potential mismanaging of the access and roles

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In initiateMigration method we are setting migratedTo to an address of the potential migration contract Later on, if completeMigration is called, it basically checks if the provided oldContract is equal to migratedTo when we enter the migrateReward metho...

Allowance underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact I think the following check is unnecessary but furthermore, there should be a comparison if the allowance amount allowed is equal or greater than shares amount. Otherwise, we would end up with underflow of the uint value Proof of Concept Tools Used Manua...

Use Of block.timestamp Can Result In Attacker Manipulating His/Her Rewards In Their Favour

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If an attacker manipulates the block.timestamp in their favor then they can get higher rewards as uint256 rewards = u.rewards + u.lastBalance block.timestamp - u.lastUpdate in this equation lets say the attacker called this just now , and on the next...

Possible lost msg.value in function distributeFees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Author: rotcivegaf Impact The function distributeFees don't checks if the tokenId exists and if the owner send value to the an non-exists tokenId, this one will stuck in the contract until the tokenId will minted, and take by the owner of the minted token that...

Admin can drain user funds from the Pool or buy assets for free

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact We assume that the admin is honest, however there is still possibility of exploiting asset policy contract to and set price to 0 in oder to buy an asset for free - or even worse - drain user funds by setting the price really high in...

Exchange's _returnDust() does not validate return value of call() to send excess ETH to sender.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a caller to Exchange's execute or bulkExecute includes more ETH than is required to complete the transactions, returnDust is intended to return this excess back to the caller. However, returnDust does not validate that the call it performs to return...

Reentrancy attack can be used to externally call the _execute function in the Exchange contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Reentrancy attack can be used to externally call the execute function in the Exchange contract The execute function present in the Exchange contract is intended to be called only internally using delegatecall by the execute and bulkExecute functions. This is...

LooksRareProxy is missing the fee mechanism, protocol may loss the revenue from fee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact LooksRareProxy is missing the fee mechanism, the protocol may lose revenue from the fee. Even if you intend to have a free fee, the fee mechanism should be implemented in case you need to enforce the fee in the future. Proof of Concept function execute...

Attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract buy creating fake auction and manipulating some contract logic. POC Assuming that the SizeSealed.sol initially contains 10000 DAI tokens, I’ll demonstrate how an attacker can steal these tokens. The bug i...

Arbitrage Opportunity for Non-Sellers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Non-sellers can flood the system with arbitrage auctions. Proof of Concept The seller can wait until 1 instant minute? before the end of the auction. Now the seller places a bid a couple percent above the current market price, enough to cover the seller'...

[PNM-001] finalize with malicious input may allow multiple calls leading to fund draining

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The finalize function of the contract SizeSealed is used to finalize an auction, allowing the auctioner or seller to be paid quote tokens and also eventually allowing successful bidders to withdraw base tokens. Once the finalize function is called,...

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...

quoteToken could be fee-on-transfer token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens could have fees for each transfer, they are known as "fee-on-transfer" tokens. While there is a check inside createAuction function that prevents these tokens from being baseToken, FoT tokens still allowed to be quoteToken which could...

Seller can stole users assets by create and then cancel the auction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Seller can stole users assets by create and cancel auction Proof of Concept Seller can create an auction, then wait for people to participate in auction bidding, finally the seller cancel the auction and get the users assets. This scenario can happen wit...

Attacker can take all the winnings and fill up the bids and cause loss of funds or dos

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can fill up all the bids and steal and be the winner and cause a dos and then withdraw/refund the funds since when doing a refund the bid isn't taken off the array an attacker can make 1000 bids and cause dos and have 100 percent chance of winni...

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...

Front-running of a pledge call

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There is pledge function in the WardenPledge contract. The function accepts the pledgeId, which does not contain any information about the pledge itself. As a result, transactions of users can be front-runned to enforce them use the pledge with the...

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...

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...

Reentrance attack to _payoutEth in contract PA1D

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The payoutEth is subject to the reentrancy attack if one of the addresses is a smart contract and has a receive function to call back payoutEth directly or indirectly. The 2300 gas limit might not preve...

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,...

_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...

untyped data signing

Lines of code Vulnerability details in function deployHolographableContract the bytes32 hash is directly encoded without adding any domain separator . this will cause several issues an attacker can front run the signature and use them on same contract on another chain . eg a user wants to call...