use ECDSA helper library instead of ecrecover

Lines of code Vulnerability details use ECDSA helper library instead of ecrecover the function permit adds approval for a spender for a certain amount of value use of ecrecover to validate signatures without a nonce will allow signatures to be replayed to add additional approvals due to signature...

CNote updates the accounts after sending the funds, allowing for reentrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Having no reentrancy control and updating the records after external interactions allows for funds draining by reentrancy. Setting the severity to medium as this is conditional to transfer flow control introduction on future upgrades, but the impact is up to th...

Note: When _initialSupply ! = 0, the _mint_to_Accountant function will fail

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Note contract, if initialSupply ! = 0, totalSupply will overflow when the minttoAccountant function executes mintmsg.sender, typeuint.max constructorstring memory name, string memory symbol, uint256 totalSupply public name = name; symbol = symbol;...

InfinityExchange owner can grief with high fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The owner of the InfinityExchange contract can set any high fee values for PROTOCOLFEEBPS via the InfinityExchange.setProtocolFee function. The fee value should be limited to a maximum of 10000. If set to higher values and due to the usage across functio...

Timelock able to be bypassed because of wrong check in LibDiamond

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the walkthrough video, it said that the upgrades of Diamond must go through a proposal window with a delay of 7 days. Upgrade should be done by first call proposeDiamondCut and then wait 7 days and call diamondCut. But this timelock can be bypassed...

InfinityExchange owner can steal user's tokens via front-running

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract InfinityExchange.sol charges protocol fee through PROTOCOLFEEBPS. The issue is that owner of the contract is able to change protocol fee at any time without any restriction which puts him in a very privileged position and allows him to steal...

If token == BADGER, the _handleRewardTransfer function does not work

Lines of code MyStrategy.solL405-L413 BaseStrategy.solL346-L353 Vault.solL396-L415 Vulnerability details Impact In MyStrategy.sol, when claiming bribes or sweeping reward tokens, the handleRewardTransfer function is called which calls sendToBadgerTree to send the amount of BADGER in the contract ...

The withdrawal safety check in _withdrawSome() seems unreasonable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The withdrawal safety check in seems unreasonable. Proof of Concept I don’t understand why max = amount99.8% need to be confirmed. max should be larger than amount. And amount function withdrawSomeuint256 amount internal override returns uint256 uint256...

attacker can lock all the auraBAL rewards in contract address forever and they won't be accessible

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact auraBAL token is in protected tokens list, so it can't be transferred to bribeProcessor by using sweepRewardToken. function harvest is supposed to call LOCKER.getReward and then swap received auraBAL rewards and deposit them in LOCKER, but it only can do...

Loss of tokens due to wrong burn function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact redeemToUnderlying is also affected by the issue I reported earlier which is described below. The redeem function calls burn which is inherited from IERC777Upgradeable contract whose action is to burn ERC20 tokens, thus there is no transfer or withdrawal...

Upgraded Q -> M from 87 [1654442977298]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 87 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Issue 3 Low - Some tokens do not allow for Non-Zero to Non-Zero value approvals USDT, for example, will not allow approving a non-zero amount and then approving another non-zero amount. The approval must be reset...

Upgraded Q -> M from 124 [1654443300023]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 124 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: C4-007 : USE SAFEERC20.SAFEAPPROVE Impact This is probably an oversight since SafeERC20 was imported and safeTransfer was used for ERC20 token transfers. Nevertheless, note that approve will fail for certain tok...

Order partial fulfilling can be blocked by the first fulfiller

Lines of code Vulnerability details DOS attack is possible as OrderValidator.validateOrderAndUpdateStatus sets order's numerator and denominator based on an arbitrary fulfiller provided input. When there is a large bulk sale, an attacker can become one of the first buyers partial fulfillers and s...

Bribe.sol is not meant to handle fee-on-transfer tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Should a fee-on-transfer token be added as a reward token and deposited, the tokens will be locked in the Bribe contract. Voters will be unable to withdraw their rewards. Proof of Concept Tokens are deposited into the Bribe contract using...

External contract calls inside loops may result in DoS.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Calls to external contracts inside a loop are dangerous especially if the loop index can be user-controlled because it could lead to DoS if one of the calls reverts or execution runs out of gas. Reference Proof of Concept for uint i = 0; i 0...

BathToken with initial liquidity of 1 wei causes very expensive share price leading to precision errors and loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The creator of a new BathToken is able to maliciously manipulate the share price by providing lowest possible amount 1 wei of liquidity initialLiquidityNew and then artificially blowing up the BathToken token balance. Following depositors will loose thei...

Reserve ratio isn't enforced after a trade execution

Lines of code Vulnerability details impact Users could get exposed to higher risk than desired and funds to withdraw from the vault could not be available Proof of Concept The reserve ratio is the parameter that ensures a percentage of the tokens is always available to be withdrawn from a pool by...

Unchecked call in _withdrawFromYieldPool

Lines of code GeneralVault.solL100-L128 LidoVault.solL122-L149 Vulnerability details Impact In the withdrawFromYieldPool function in LidoVault.sol, the receivedETHAmount value is returned before the sent value for the call function is checked on line 142. When withdrawCollateral is called in...

YearnTokenAdapter's wrap can become stuck as it uses one step approval for an arbitrary underlying

Lines of code Vulnerability details Some tokens do not allow for approval of positive amount when allowance is positive already to handle approval race condition, most known example is USDT. This can cause the function to stuck whenever a combination of such a token and leftover approval be met...

Overexert on-chain slippage/loss control may cause users' funds to be frozen in the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details requirewithdrawAmount = amount.percentMul9900, Errors.VTWITHDRAWAMOUNTMISMATCH; The GeneralVault.sol contract comes with a on-chain slippage/loss control to ensure the output amount is no more than 1% less of the requested amount. This can be a problem when the...

Loss of funds due to beneficiary override to address(0) during transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Premiums or proceeds earned after the transfer will accrue to the zero address, instead of to the new vault owner, and the funds will be irrecoverable. Proof of concept vaultBeneficiariesvaultId is overridden to the zero address during transfer: File: Cally.sol...

[WP-H0] Fake balances can be created for not-yet-existing ERC20 tokens, which allows attackers to set traps to steal funds from future users

Lines of code Vulnerability details function createVault uint256 tokenIdOrAmount, address token, ... external returns uint256 vaultId ... Vault memory vault = Vault ... ; // vault index should always be odd vaultIndex += 2; vaultId = vaultIndex; vaultsvaultId = vault; // give msg.sender vault tok...

A malicious user can create a vault that is actually empty

Lines of code Vulnerability details description A malicious user can call the createVault function to create a vault with an ERC20 token that returns false rather than revert on failed transfer. By specifying the tokenType parameter to be ERC721 the transferFrom function will be called rather tha...

steal user funds with front-running when he calls depositTokens() of MerkleDropFactory with wrong treeIndex (uninitiated)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user calls depositTokens with wrong treeIndex value by mistake, attacker can perform front-running attack and steal user funds before user transaction reach the contract, attacker will create multiple trees in MerkleDropFactory until he reach tree...

transfer is used for transfering ether

Originally submitted by warden pauliax in 173, duplicate of 52. .transfer is used for transfering ether, e.g.: payableto.transferamount; payablemsg.sender.transferamount; It is currently not recommended as recipients with custom fallback functions smart contracts will not be able to handle that...

CNft.sol - revert inside safeTransferFrom will break composability & standard behaviour

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function safeTransferFrom is a standard interface in ERC1155, and its expected to succeed if all the parametes are valid, and revert on error, which is not the case here so its a deviation. Refer to the EIP-1155 safeTransferFrom rules: MUST revert if to is...

EthPool use payable.transfer with an arbitrary receiver

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact EthPool sends out native tokens via payable.transfer call. This is unsafe as transfer has hard coded gas budget and can fail when the to is a smart contract. Such transactions will fail for smart contract users which don't fit to 2300 gas stipend transfe...

IndexLogic: An attacker can burn other users' tokens to transfer assets to himself

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the burn function of the IndexLogic contract, the user needs to transfer the tokens to the contract first, and then call the burn function to withdraw the assets. The attacker can monitor the number of tokens in the contract. When it is not 0, the...

Update initializer modifier to prevent reentrancy during initialization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The solution uses: "@openzeppelin/contracts": "^4.0.0", "@openzeppelin/contracts-upgradeable": "^4.3.2", These dependencies have a known high severity vulnerability: Which makes these contracts vulnerable: contracts/helpers/CryptoPunksHelper.sol: 19:...

Reentrancy issue in yVault.deposit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In deposit, the balance is cached and then a token.transferFrom is triggered which can lead to exploits if the token is a token that gives control to the sender, like ERC777 tokens. POC Initial state: balance = 1000, shares supply = 1000. Depositing 1000...

Undercollateralized loans possible

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setPoolCollateralFactors function does not check that the collateral factor is 100%. It's possible that it's set to 200% and then borrows more than the collateral is worth, stealing from the pool. Recommended Mitigation Steps Disable the possibility ...

Inconsistent use of oracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Throughout the protocol, oracles are relied upon to keep Volt stable, calculate payouts to users, and judge whether actions are eligible to be carried out. On the NonCustodialPSM contract, oracle is updated with the updateOracle function. However, there ...

Lack of Limit on amount Allows Borrowers To Be Extorted For Interest Payments

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is on limit on the upper bounds on the amount a lender may send to a borrower. Borrowers will then be forced to pay interest and facilitators fee on the full amount loaned. The impact for a borrower is that they may be forced to repay significantly...

Emergency mode enable/disable issue

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Enabling emergency mode should be one way process that sets contracts in emergency mode. It should be not possible to revert that process, otherwise it puts owner of the contracts in very privileged position. Owner can trigger emergency mode, perform...

One co-creator with a small share can get 100% of the funds in the splitter

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact One co-creator with a small share can get 100% of the funds by calling the incrementWindow function from an attacker contract that mimics RoyaltyVault. He can then create one or multiple fake windows and claim them to get the full balance of the splitter...

Swap Functions Do Not Verify Final Token Matches The Swapped Token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When calling Swapper.executeSwaps there are no checks to ensure the received token matches the final swapped token. If these are different it may result in user funds being locked in the contract. This issue is present in each of the following functions:...

Option create can be denied

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept A griefer can frontrun the createOption from a user and user's tx will revert. This line will revert because of this Recommended Mitigation Steps One gas efficient way to prevent this is to mix msg.sender into salt. --- The text was updated...

Duplicate _tokenNameSuffix and _tokenSymbolSuffix will incorrectly update current Market

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impacted Function: createMarket Description: 1. Owner calls createMarket with tokenNameSuffix S1 and tokenSymbolSuffix S2 which creates a new market M1 with deployedMarketssalt pointing to M1. Here salt can be S which is computed using tokenNameSuffix and...

Fee-on-transfer/deflationary tokens cause problems

Lines of code Vulnerability details Some ERC20 tokens, such as Tether USDT, allow for charging a fee any time transfer or transferFrom is called. If a contract does not allow for amounts to change after transfers, subsequent transfer operations based on the original amount will revert due to the...

areOperatorsImported has incorrect logic

This issue has been created to upgrade a QA report submission to a medium severity finding. From 0xliumin: areOperatorsImported has incorrect logic Right now, this function returns false if the implementation AND the selector don't match. It's possible to provide a destination with either a...

No ERC20 safe* versions called on mainnet deposit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some mainnet 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. Non-safe...

settleFunding will exceed block gas with more markets and activity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As the number of supported markets grow, settleFunding will reach a point were it exceeds the block gas limit on Avalanche C-Chain. This will prevent users from calling the function and cause a wide spread Denial of Service. Looking at transactions for t...

ERC4626.mint() doesn't mint the correct amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The ERC4626.mint function doesn't mint the correct amount of tokens. Instead of minting amount number of tokens, it should mint shares number of tokens. Since the user doesn't receive the correct amount of tokens I'd rate this issue "HIGH". Proof of...

Arbitrary fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function transferBribes has a parameter named fees. Essentially, it allows an admin to apply any arbitrary fees and send them to the feeRecipient. This makes no sense because admins can manipulate the amounts however they want with 0 restrictions. I see...

[WP-H3] Centralization Risk: Funds can be frozen when critical key holders lose access to their keys

Lines of code Vulnerability details The current implementation requires trusted key holders DEFAULTADMINROLE of BribeVault to send transactions transferBribes to move funds from BribeVault to RewardDistributor before the users can get rewards from the contract. This introduces a high centralizati...

Reentrancy in depositBribeERC20

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The contract was found vulnerable to Reentrancy attack. It was noticed that the function depositBribeERC20 makes an external call to another untrusted address or a contract before it resolves any effects at line "" If the attacker controls the...

Shelter funds can be stolen

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Shelter has a function withdraw that lets whitelisted users withdraw a specified amount of some token. The function does not check if the user has already withdrew the tokens. Since, a user can withdraw allowed amount any number of times, stealing all th...

ConvexStakingWrapper._calcRewardIntegral() Has An Accounting Error When Updating reward.remaining

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The ConvexStakingWrapper.sol implementation makes several modifications to the original design. One of the key changes is the way rewards are distributed to stakers. A new ConcurRewardPool.sol contract is used to store rewards, allowing users to claim...

MasterChef.add must update pools first

Lines of code Vulnerability details The MasterChef.add function changes the total pool allocation but does not update other pools first. When other pools are finally updated at some point, then accConcurPerShare will be wrongly computed with their smaller allocPoint / newTotalAllocPoint share eve...

tokenOut is only required on finalize

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact I thought of a potential rug pull from the owner: when users buy tokenOut, it is not required that the contract has already escrowed enough tokenOut. It is only required when finalizing the sale: require tokenOut.balanceOfaddressthis = totalTokenOutBough...