10190 matches found
Anyone can remove feeders from NFTFloorOracle.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no onlyRole modifier in removeFeeder, so anyone can remove feeders from NFTFloorOracle, and it will cause a DOS attack. Proof of Concept function removeFeederaddress feeder external onlyWhenFeederExistedfeeder //@audit no modifier...
call() should be used instead of transfer() on an address payable
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact call should be used instead of transfer on an address payable Proof of Concept The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address will inevitably make the transaction fail when: 1. The claimer smart contract does not implement a payable function...
LPDA refund logic is broken, meaning buyers always get lowest price sale
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol intends the LPDA to refunds buyers with the difference between the price they paid and the last sale price Once the sale has ended, the users must call refund to get their Ether refunds based on their purchase price and lowest sale price 99:...
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...
Anyone can call addLiquidity function and be the router
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone can call addLiquidity, meaning that when IAddLiquidityCallbackmsg.sender.addLiquidityCallbacktokenAAmount, tokenBAmount, data; is called, the msg.sender can be a contract that a malicious user has deployed and has a addLiquidityCallbacktokenAAmoun...
Potential security issues in CallLib solidity library
Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: The CallLib solidity library contains several potential security issues that could be exploited by attackers. Issue 1: The executeCalls function does not check if the sender parameter is the contract owner before allowing the calls to be executed...
Upgraded Q -> M from #316 [1670230229509]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 316 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: compound in AutoPxGmx can be called by anyone and can be sandwiched if a poorly chosen amountOutMinimum is used. The idea is to call the function often by adding an incentive to the caller. There is a problematic...
ExecutorAware doesn't adequately validate sender for nonce
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contracts on the execution chain are asked to inherit from ExecutorAware.sol. This gives them the ability to check msgSender and nonce pulled from the calldata in the format encoded by the executor. While the msgSender function adequately checks that the...
Cross-chain request does not have expiration time
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Cross-chain request does not have expiration time Proof of Concept In the current implementation, a caller in source chain can perform a relayer call to starts a cross-chain request. But it is not clearly when the executor will be executing the...
ProcessedCalls event missing transaction hash
Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The CrossChainRelayerArbitrum contract is missing the txHash parameter in the ProcessedCalls event. Impact The txHash is used to identify the transaction that was processed. Without this parameter, it will be impossible to know which transaction was...
Functions like AutoPxGmx.withdraw and AutoPxGmx.redeem do not provide effective slippage control
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As shown below, calling the AutoPxGmx.withdraw and AutoPxGmx.redeem functions would execute compoundpoolFee, 1, 0, true, which uses the hardcoded 1 as the amountOutMinimum input of the AutoPxGmx.compound function to further call the...
Potential uint underflow
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Potential underflow if shares is greater than totalSupply Proof of Concept Tools Used Manual review Recommended Mitigation Steps Before the following line, check if totalSupply is greater or equal to shares --- The text was updated successfully, but thes...
There is no re-register o re-assign function
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no re-register or re-assign option for the smart contracts. Let's assume a smart contract is registered either through the register function with a new NFT minted or the assign function to an existing NFT. However, if somehow, the NFT is burned ...
NameWrapper: one can renew to DoS a Name
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone with enough eth can make a name impossible to be used anymore Proof of Concept Below is a snippet of the proof of concept. The whole code can be found in this gist. And how to run test is in the comment in the gist. This proof of concept...
NameWrapper: Wrapped to Unregistered to ignore PARENT_CANNOT_CONTROL
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact owner of a wrapped node without CANNOTUNWRAP fuse can unwrap and set the ens.ownernode to zero to be an unregistered state if it happens, even if the node has PARENTCANNOTCONTROL fuse, the parent of the node can change the NameWrappwer.owner of the node...
A registered contract won't earn fees if _recipient is a fresh address
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users might fall victims of a false positive: if they use a fresh account as an NFT recipient during contract registration, the transaction won't revert, but the registered contract will never earn fees for the token holder. And since a contract can be...
The check for msg.value in distributeFees is unnecessary and may cause error
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Transactions may fail because of this redundant check. Proof of Concept The function distributeFees will revert if msg.value == 0: function distributeFeesuint256 tokenId public onlyOwner payable if msg.value == 0 revert NothingToDistribute; balancestoken...
Upgraded Q -> M from #307 [1669043813221]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 307 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1. Wrong comparison sign Description The function swapAVAXForExactTokens will revert when msg.value amountsIn0 because amountsIn0 - msg.value will always cause underflow. Solidity version ^0.8.0 is used, so it will...
Users can block other users from redeeming their ETH in Vaults
Lines of code Vulnerability details The burnLPToken of a protected vault allow users to burn LP tokens in exchange of ETH or dETH. In the case of ETH, ie when the BLS key has not had its derivatives minted yet, the function checks the liquidity is not fresh by checking...
value can be burned in burnLPToken but nothing withdrawn
Lines of code Vulnerability details value can be burned in burnLPToken but nothing withdrawn Summary If initial amount is not big enough, value can get truncated by division of 24 ether and therefore be 0 the redemptionValue. Therefore, this value to be withdrawn would be lost. PoC // redeem savE...
Unbounded loop can run out of gas in withdraw and unstake operations
Lines of code Vulnerability details Unbounded loop can run out of gas in withdraw and unstake operations Impact There are no bounds on the number of orders in the loop, this can run out of gas due to cost of the operations that can vary by the time. Proof Of Concept function withdrawLPTokensLPTok...
Single-step process for critical ownership transfer/renounce is risky
Lines of code Vulnerability details Single-step process for critical ownership transfer/renounce is risky Impact The following contracts and functions, allow owners to interact with core functions such as: execute, rawExecute and setApproval in OwnableSmartWallet registerKnotsToSyndicate,...
Upgraded Q -> M from #474 [1668467584757]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 474 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-01 Flashloan fee is not validated flashLoanFee is determined at LBFactory's constructor as; constructoraddress feeRecipient, uint256 flashLoanFee setFeeRecipientfeeRecipient; flashLoanFee = flashLoanFee; emit...
Recipients Can Steal Remaining ETH from Exchange
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This vulnerability allows recipients to reenter the Exchange contract, stealing remaining ETH. When a batch of orders are matched using the bulkExecute method a malicious recipient of assets may reenter the bulkExecute method, stealing ETH that would've...
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...
ETH amount that is trapped in LooksRareAggregator contract can be withdrawn by user who is not LooksRareAggregator's owner
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When ETH amount is trapped in the LooksRareAggregator contract, such as when someone accidentally sends some ETH to it, the owner of the LooksRareAggregator contract has the privilege to call the rescueETH function to transfer such amount to a proper...
The owner of the contract can broke the storage of the LooksRareAggregator contract
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The owner of the contract can broke the storage of the LooksRareAggregator contract Proof of Concept The addFunction function - can be called by the owner to to set proxy address and function selector for the function to be called inside this proxy. This...
Seller can steal ETH which is for other orders of the bulk
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The 'bulkExecute' and 'returnDust' functions are susceptible to reentrancy attack. Seller can exploit it to steal ETH which is for other orders of the bulk. Proof of Concept Key steps for successful attack 1 set fee rate to 100% 2 reentrancy call...
Upgraded Q -> M from #107 [1668211909800]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 107 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L-01 WardenPledge inherits Ownable instead of Owner The contract imports Owner.sol but inherits Ownable - should both import and inherit Owner --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:...
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...
Potential DoS when closing a credit nominated in ETH in the LineOfCredit contract
Lines of code Vulnerability details When closing a credit that was issued in ETH, the LineOfCredit contract will send the lender his deposit and any accrued interests using the address.transferamount function, which may fail and revert the whole function, leading to an eventual DoS. Impact The...
Using keccak256(abi.encoded()) can result in collisions
Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The code in mutualConsent makes use of keccak256abi.encodePacked but this can result in a collision when the arguments of abi.encodePacked are aligned in a way that gives the same result. Impact Having hash collisions in mutualConsent...
L1ERC20Bridge does not have an emergency stop mechanism to pause the bridge in case of any problems found.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Right now, L1ERC20Bridge implements nonReentrant and access control mechanism to improve security. However, there is not any emergency stop mechanism that can be triggered by an authorized account to pause the bridge in case of some problems. It is highl...
Governor ownership can be lost because of not sanity check
Lines of code Vulnerability details Governor ownership can be lost because of no checks Impact Sanity checks are important to not affect reputation / flows and users of the protocol when a mistake is done. 0 address should be checked for important address assignments in this case, only done in th...
WHEN EVER CALLING bridgeMint OR bridgeBurn FUNCTIONS NEED TO CHECK THE STATUS OF THE TRANSACTIONS
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If not checking the status of the bridgeMint and bridgeBurn functions we don't know the the transactions are success or not. If function breaks any of the reasons we don't what happened and what is the status of the transactions. there is no solutions...
Solmate's safeTransfer function does not check the existence of the contract
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Miscalculation of transferred funds and finally, loss of funds Proof of Concept Solmate's safeTransfer and safeTransferFrom functions do not check the ext code size of the address of the recipient and so, it may lead to a miscalculation of funds as it...
[PNM-003] finalize can be called by bidders, allows them to cancelBid
Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The finalize function is used to finalize the auction, locking all bids, and paying the seller. However, any user, including bidders can call finalize, as it is a public function, and there are no user checks. This may allow bidders to input malicio...
A bidder can buy baseToken with low price by exploiting the DOS prevention measure
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In order to prevent DOS attacks, the smart contract introduces a measure that limits the number of bids on an auction SizeSealed.solL157-L159. However, an attacker/bidder can exploit this measure to block others to place bids so that the attacker can buy...
Refinalization with theft of funds from other auctions
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. There is a prevention of the refinalization by the modifier atStateidToAuctionauctionId,...
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...
No incentive mechanism for allowed senders to call finalizeWithdrawal on behalf of withdrawers.
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since finalizeWithdrawal is a permissioned function, if there are no mechanism in place for allowed senders to trigger it, withdrawers would not able to receive their funds in a timely fashion. Proof of Concept The withdrawal functions such...
Upgraded Q -> H from 502 [1667614581063]
Judge has assessed an item in Issue 502 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...
Unchecked array length of the public_inputs[] in Verifier.sol
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If an array enumerates all registered addresses, an adversary can register many addresses, causing the problem described above. Vulnerability Details Ethereum is a very resource-constrained environment. Prices per computational step are orders of magnitu...
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...
Reuse of previous voting difference in extendPledge() charges too much fees
Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In Warden Pledge, creators can extend the life span of an existing pledge using extendPledge. Here's the implementation: uint256 addedDuration = newEndTimestamp - oldEndTimestamp; ifaddedDuration maxTotalRewardAmount revert...
recoverERC20 can drain user's funds
Lines of code Vulnerability details recoverERC20 function is deployed so users who have accidently sent erc20 tokens to the contract be able to recover them. recoverERC20 uses ifminAmountRewardTokentoken != 0 revert Errors.CannotRecoverToken; to check if token was set to one of the RewardTokens o...
Owner can steal all the rewards token from the WardenPledge.sol smart contract and break the internal accounting
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The owner of the WardenPledge.sol smart contract can steal all the reward tokens from the contract and break the internal accounting. With the recoverERC20 function, the owner can transfer to him/herself the whole balance of the token. The check at L654...
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...
Owner can drain pledged tokens balance with recoverERC20 function
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The recoverERC20 function allows the owner to withdraw the ERC20 tokens sent by acceident to the contract but it doesn't allow him to withdraw pldged tokens, the owner though could use the removeRewardToken function to remove a token used currently in a...
Wrong logic at Fed.resign()
Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Fed contract has resign function which sets the chair address to address0. The NATSPEC states that this function is useful for immediately removing chair powers in case of a wallet compromise. Since the chair wallet is a multisig wallet, in the event...