Upgraded Q -> 2 from #621 [1675724705438]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 621 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L2 - mintReceipt function lacks a check to verify if the quest has already ended mintReceipt function missing check for ended quest. This could result in a scenario where a receipt is minted after the quest has ended...

Squeezing drips from a sender can be front-run and prevented by the sender

Lines of code Vulnerability details Squeezing drips from a sender requires providing the sequence of drips configurations see NatSpec description in L337-L338: /// It can start at an arbitrary past configuration, but must describe all the configurations /// which have been used since then includi...

MinipoolManager: node operator can avoid being slashed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When staking is done, a Rialto multisig calls MinipoolManager.recordStakingEnd . If the avaxTotalRewardAmt has the value zero, the MinipoolManager will slash the node operator's GGP. The issue is that the amount to slash can be greater than the GGP balan...

setDrips may distribute the drip too fast if the time hints are not good enough

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setDrips function is used to configure a drip. It can either be withdrawing it, adding a new one, or even managing an existing one by updating the configuration. Internally, it account for the drips that are yet to be distributed to refund them to th...

DOS mint and add by frontrunning

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact CidNFT.mintbytes allow user to mint and add subprotocol NFTs directly after minting. The addList args to the add call include the cidNFTID param, which can change if there are other mint before the user's transaction. Proof of Concept An attacker can DOS...

Use abi.encode instead of abi.encodePacked to prevent data collisions for object hashing

Lines of code Vulnerability details M-01 Use abi.encode instead of abi.encodePacked Impact hash collisions on the data stored for object hashing Proof of Concept From the solidity documentation: If you use keccak256abi.encodePackeda, b and both a and b are dynamic types, it is easy to craft...

Critical Vulnerability exposed Reentrancy attack allowing unlimited Fund Withdrawals.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function register where it transfers a fixed amount of $NOTE tokens 100 $NOTE to the cidFeeWallet address without checking the reentrancy status. An attacker can repeatedly call this function to drain the contract balance...

Locked Ether

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Contract with a payable function, but without a withdrawal capacity. Impact Every Ether sent to LendgineRouter will be lost. Proof of Concept File: src/periphery/LendgineRouter.sol 142: function mintMintParams calldata params external payable...

Unprotected Ether Withdrawal

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Due to missing or insufficient access controls, malicious parties can withdraw some or all Ether from the contract account. This bug is sometimes caused by unintentionally exposing initialization functions. By wrongly naming a function intended to b...

Fee on transfer tokens will not behave as expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Numoen, it does not specifically restrict the type of ERC20 collateral used for borrowing. If fee on transfer tokens is/are entailed, it will specifically make mint revert in Lendgine.sol when checking if balanceAfter balanceBefore + collateral. Proof...

Loss of funds - User has control of the fallback function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Imapct: Lendengine check the balanceBefore and after of token1, after sending tokens via a mintFallback function. During this fallback the user has access to theses tokens so far as it's returned + collateral the fallback is satisfied. A attacker can take out...

Possibly Susceptible to Reentrancy Attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. No protection against reentrancy attacks, which could allow an attacker to exploit the contract's logic by calling functions in the contract before the original call is completed. Proof of Concept To...

Modifier onlyMinter() implementation is faulty

Lines of code Vulnerability details The current implementation of the modifier onlyMinter will not revert because the "require" part is missing, therefore any user will be able to access the minting functions in RabbitHoleTickets.sol and RabbitHoleReceipt.sol. Impact Any user than the allowed...

QuestFactory is suspicious of the reorg attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The createQuest function deploys a quest contract using the create, where the address derivation depends only on the QuestFactory nonce. At the same time, some of the chains Polygon, Optimism, Arbitrum to which the QuestFactory will be deployed are...

Lack of flexibility in updating cycle length leading to potential contract redeployment.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact function cycleOfuint32 timestamp private view returns uint32 cycle unchecked return timestamp / cycleSecs + 1; and function currCycleStart private view returns uint32 timestamp uint32 currTimestamp = currTimestamp; // slither-disable-next-line weak-prng...

Mitigation of M-06: Issue not mitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details The sponsor disputes the issue, but never follows up after judge's comments, so the same issue remains in the new code. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Mitigation of M-06: Issue not mitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of M-06: Issue not mitigated --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Loss of ETH for proposer when it is a contract that doesn't have fallback function.

Lines of code Vulnerability details The issue that is described in code-423n4/2022-12-tessera-findings40 was not mitigated and still applies like it is described there. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Overflow Vulnerability in Splits Contract Due to Maximum Splits Receivers Limitation (_MAX_SPLITS_RECEIVERS = 200)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If more than 200 splits receivers are added for a single user, the constant MAXSPLITSRECEIVERS will be exceeded, causing unexpected behavior in the contract uint256 internal constant MAXSPLITSRECEIVERS = 200; Proof of Concept a. Create an array of splits...

Timeswap Options has no reentry check and is providing a set of flashloan with no fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details high-flashloan-provider @timeswap Impact In the file /package/v2-option/TimeswapV2Option.sol, There are a range of functions that has no Reentry check. As a consequence, when the contract call back msg.sender, an attacker can then reeentry in his own callee...

In TimeswapV2LiquidityToken.sol and TimeswapV2Token.sol, different positions might be minted to the same id.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In this protocol, all positions should have unique ids to track and update their status. Currently, different positions might be minted to the same id and the main logic for the positions will be broken. Proof of Concept TimeswapV2LiquidityToken.mint set...

STORAGE LOCATION OF liquidityPosition OF ONE USER IS OVERWRITEN BY THE liquidityPosition OF ANOTHER USER

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the pool.sol contract under the transferFees function, the pool liquidity position of the msg.sender is assigned to the storage variable liquidityPosition. And this liquidityPosition is updated for new fee allocation and fee burning. The transaction f...

_currentIndex is incorrectly updated; breaking the ERC1155 enumerable implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When minting and burning tokens,the ERC1155Enumerable implementation does not correctly update the following states: uint256 private allTokens; mappinguint256 = uint256 private allTokensIndex; mappingaddress = uint256 internal currentIndex; In particular...

Improper check for Zero Address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. There is an error in the if statement of the referenced line of code. It should check for zero address and return an error. This will prevent the creating a new contract for an existing option pair, eve...

ERC1155Enumerable._removeTokenEnumeration() checks the removal condition wrongly.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC1155Enumerable.removeTokenEnumeration checks the removal condition wrongly. As a result, the tokens with 0 total supply won't be removed from allTokens array at all. Proof of Concept removeTokenEnumeration checks the removal condition like below when ...

Upgraded Q -> M from #404 [1674736594739]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 404 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑04 latestAnswer is deprecated Use latestRoundData instead so that you can tell whether the answer is stale or not. The latestAnswer function returns zero if it is unable to fetch data, which may be the case if...

The transferFeesFrom function does not check if the "from" address is the actual owner of the position before transferring the fees.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The code Doesn't check if the from address is the owner of the position before transferring the fees. If the from address is not the owner of the position, an attacker could potentially transfer fees from another user's position without their permission...

Upgraded Q -> M from #313 [1674663275698]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 313 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-07 centralization risks The owner address of PoolAddressesProvider contract has control over many dangerous functions. Such as: setAddressAsProxy, setPoolConfiguratorImpl and updatePoolImpl which are responsable fo...

Upgraded Q -> M from #351 [1674418158719]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 351 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Stable Vault cannot accept tokens with more then 18 decimals because of this lines: Consider using different conversion formula. For example: amount 1e18 / 10token.decimals for deposit and amount 10token.decimals /...

Upgraded Q -> M from #268 [1674418407759]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 268 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 Front running attacks by the owner Project has one possible attack vectors by the onlyOwner: dao.Fees , burnsFees , referralFees , botFees variable; It determines the fees rate The default deposit fees equal zer...

ConduitController: Smart Contract Initial Owner Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description The createConduit function in the ConduitController smart contract is responsible for deploying new conduits, or contracts that allow registered callers or open "channels" to transfer approved ERC20/721/1155 tokens on their behalf. The function...

Governance manipulation through signatures

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The impact is critical because it enables anyone to submit as many signatures as they want manipulating the governance. The probe relies that in the delegateBySig function, the nonce it is not checked upon msg.sender, it is checked upon the output for th...

Fee on transfer based collateral is not considered.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It has following impacts. 1. backingManager would be transferred with lesser than deposits 2. Recorded liabilities will be more 3. collateral deposited into the RToken contract would be lesser than deposits Proof of Concept Any one can mint RToken by...

Possible Unauthorized Redemption of Collateral ERC20 Tokens due to Lack of Proper Check in redeem() Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker who is not authorized by the smart contract could potentially redeem more tokens than they are entitled to. This could cause a loss of funds for the smart contract and its users, as well as potentially destabilizing the overall ecosystem...

Unchecked return price > 0 oracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function price, there is no check that the return price that chainlink sends is 0. uint80 roundId, int256 p, , uint256 updateTime, uint80 answeredInRound = chainlinkFeed .latestRoundData; if updateTime == 0 || answeredInRound timeout revert...

Transfer of assets should come before deleting and burning the collateral id

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Clldata id is burnt and deleted before transfer Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the concept...

Rounding error "confiscastes" some collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are no adjustments for collateral that is not returned on redemptions due to rounding errors. It will stay in the assetSender however, it will look as if was fully paid out. The rounding error also depends on the burned quantity, so it may be...

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...

validateUserOp does not check if missingAccountFunds matchs the signature

Lines of code Vulnerability details validateUserOp function does not check to see if missingAccountFunds uint256 matchs the signature or not . this can be abused if an attacker front run the tx and call validateUserOp in entrypoint using same sig but with a different missingaccountfunds number...

Unsafe Storage Layout

Lines of code Vulnerability details Potentially lead to storage collision and cause the account to be re-initialized or have ownership transferred. Use upgradeable DiamondStorage for all inherited contracts. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

TokenggAVAX.sol : First depositor can break minting of shares

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...

Grief on transfers due to vestingStart during vesting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Past similar finding with the same severity: code-423n4/2022-05-runes-findings30 While centralization risk is acknowledged by the team & the C4udit tool: this may lead to loss of functionality grief. Proof of concept There is no requirement for the start...

purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT() may incorrectly returned the Auction funds to the liquidated user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact may incorrectly returned the Auction funds to the liquidated user in purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT, After someone purchases the auction NFT, the amount of the auction received will be distributed. In the existing logic, when the amount of the auction is...

Reentrancy attack allows to get loan for free

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reentrancy attack allows to get loan for free when startLiquidationAuction is called on last collateral token. Proof of Concept When user has a bad debt, then anyone can start auction for his nft. To purchase token, liquidator can call...

Misunderstanding operator with from

Lines of code Vulnerability details Author: rotcivegaf Impact The owner of the ERC721 token could approve an operator to manage his tokens With the misunderstanding of operator with from in the onERC721Received function the benefits of this function goes to the operator instead of the fromowner:...

Insufficient Timestamp Validation for Signed Messages

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A message can be signed by the oracle for any future point in time, and it will be valid for 20 minutes. If messages with invalid timestamps pointing to the future get signed, there is no way of invalidating them. A compromised or malfunctioning oracle...

Borrowers may earn auction proceeds without filling the debt shortfall

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The proceeds from the collateral auctions will not be used to fill the debt shortfall, but be transferred directly to the borrower. Proof of Concept Assume N is an allowed NFT, B is a borrower, the vault V is vaultInfoBN: 1. B add two NFTsN-1 and N-2 as...

User can send a proposal and instantly take back their collateral, keeping the proposal active without risking any Raes amount.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In OptimisticListingSeaport.sol, users call propose to set a new proposal. The pendingBalance is updated immediately for the calling proposer: // Sets collateral amount to pending balances for withdrawal pendingBalancesvaultproposedListing.proposer ...

[M-0] Unhandled return values of transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details c4udit Report Issues found M-0 Unhandled return values of transfer Impact Some implementations of transfer could return ‘false’ on failure instead of reverting. Findings: src\Pair.sol::85 = transferFrommsg.sender, addressthis, fractionalTokenAmount;...

Only one GroupBuy can ever use USDT or similar tokens with front-running approval protections

Lines of code Vulnerability details Calling approve without first calling approve0 if the current approval is non-zero will revert with some tokens, such as Tether USDT. While Tether is known to do this, it applies to other tokens as well, which are trying to protect against this attack vector...