Increase liquidity in close position may not cover original borrowed liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary When a position is closed, there is no check to ensure that the effective added liquidity covers the original borrowed liquidity from the LP. Impact Closing a position in the Particle LAMM protocol must ensure that the borrowed liquidity gets fully adde...

Unchecked return value of low-level call()/delegatecall()

Lines of code 120, 141, 411, 184, 160, 189, 152, 444, 625, 638https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapioca-bar-audit/blob/2286f80f928f41c8bc189d0657d74ba83286c668/contract...

InitCore.liquidate will revert in case if poolOut is paused for collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept InitCore.liquidate function tries to check, that provided poolOut variable is valid pool of protocol. It does it using vars.config.isAllowedForCollateral check. As you can see, in case if poolOut will be paused as collateral for the mode, then...

Array is push()ed but not pop()ed, and is iterated over

Lines of code 96, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/ta...

bad debt is not socialized

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept In case if borrower's position is unhealthy, then he can be liquidated. Liquidator can provide amount of shares in poolToRepay that he will cover and expects to get back poolOut shares. It is possible that position created a bad debt. This mean...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...

InitiCore.liquidate uses stale toShares function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept When position is going to be liquidated, then liquidator provides poolToRepay and poolOut. He wants to repay some amount to poolToRepay and get shares from poolOut back according to repaid amount + bonus. ILendingPoolpoolOut.toShares function i...

Use of transferFrom() rather than safeTransferFrom() for NFTs in will lead to the loss of NFTs

Lines of code 230, 342, 514, 536 Vulnerability details The EIP-721 standard says the following about transferFrom: /// @notice Transfer ownership of an NFT -- THE CALLER IS RESPONSIBLE /// TO CONFIRM THAT to IS CAPABLE OF RECEIVING NFTS OR ELSE /// THEY MAY BE PERMANENTLY LOST /// @dev Throws...

TEST HIGH

Lines of code L1 Vulnerability details TEST --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Reentrancy in NextGenMinterContract.mint() allows exceeding max allowance and concurrent use of NFTs in NextGenMinterContract.burnToMint()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact 1. Bypassing maxAllowance in NextGenMinterContract.mint: Enables minting more NFTs than permitted. 2. Exploiting reentrancy in NextGenMinterContract.burnToMint: Allows acquiring both burnable and mintable NFTs at the same time. Proof of Concept The 1st...

Unchecked return value of low-level call()/delegatecall()

Lines of code 120, 141, 411, 184, 160, 189, 152, 444, 625, 638https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapioca-bar-audit/blob/2286f80f928f41c8bc189d0657d74ba83286c668/contract...

Calls to get_virtual_price() are vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

Lines of code 117 Vulnerability details getvirtualprice was originally considered to be a manipulation-resistant price - suitable as a price oracle, but it was later found to be vulnerable to a read-only reentrancy attack, where the Curve contract could be put into a partially-modified state, and...

REDUNDANT ERC1155 OCEAN TOKEN BALANCE UPDATE OF THE OceanAdapter CONTRACT COULD LEAD TO DoS OF THE Ocean._computeOutputAmount TRANSACTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Ocean.computeOutputAmount function is used to compute the output amount of an output token when the input token and input token amount is given. The Ocean.computeOutputAmount function mutates the ERC1155 token ledger amounts for the primitives and al...

Incorrect indexing in constructor of Curve Adapters causes both contracts to assume xToken and lpToken to be the same token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Curve Adapter contracts are unusable, as the protocol won't be able to tell the difference between which token USDC/USDT or lpToken is intended on being used for the transaction. Vulnerability details In the constructors of the Curve2PoolAdapter.sol and...

Potential Gas and Overflow Issues with Decimal Shift Left in _convertDecimals Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The exponentiation operation in the decimal shift left scenario can lead to high gas consumption and potential integer overflow. The gas cost and risk of overflow increase with the value of the exponent, which could make the function expensive or even...

Return values of transfer()/transferFrom() not checked

Lines of code 377, 509, 491, 530, 42, 50 Vulnerability details Impact Not all IERC20 implementations revert when there's a failure in transfer/transferFrom. The function signature has a boolean return value and they indicate errors that way instead. By not checking the return value, operations th...

Excess funds sent via msg.value not refunded

Lines of code 201 Vulnerability details Impact The code below allows the caller to provide Ether, but does not refund the amount in excess of what's required, leaving funds stranded in the contract. The condition should be changed to check for equality, or the code should refund the excess. File:...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details Impact The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #776 [1701285150754]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 776 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Low-01 No minimum AmountrsETH receive parameter absent in depositAsset Here we can see that User deposit asset via depositAsset which take asset address and asset depositAmount as parameter Then rsethAmountMinted...

Calls to get_virtual_price() are vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

Lines of code 117 Vulnerability details Impact getvirtualprice was originally considered to be a manipulation-resistant price - suitable as a price oracle, but it was later found to be vulnerable to a read-only reentrancy attack, where the Curve contract could be put into a partially-modified...

The owner is a single point of failure and a centralization risk

Lines of code 56, 109, 127, 172, 219, 250, 115, 131, 154, 116, 131https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapiocaz-audit/blob/bcf61f79464cfdc0484aa272f9f6e28d...

LACK OF DEADLINE AND SLIPPAGE CHECKS COULD PROMPT THE USERS TO EXECUTE THE BUY AND SELL TRANSACTIONS AT UNFAVOURABLE PRICE POINTS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Market.sol contract implements four functions which depend on the linear bonding curve to calculate the price and fee amounts associated with their logic execution. These functions are Market.buy, Market.sell, Market.mintNFT and Market.burnNFT. The...

No way to withdraw from the strategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact NodeDelegator does not have any functions to withdraw the underlying from the strategy. It does have a function to transfer ERC-20 tokens to the LRTDepositPool, assuming the eigen layer strategy mints ERC20 tokens to represent the share of invested funds...

latestRoundData recommendation does not have consideration for stale price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue is highlighted in the bot L-2 finding but fail to highlight the importance for checking stale price. The ChainlinkPriceOracle when calls out to a Chainlink oracle receiving using the recommended latestRoundData it can get stale price, if there ...

First depositor will get twice more minted token for the same amount deposited

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The initial depositor stands to gain an unfair amount of RSETH tokens compared to later depositors, as a result of the fixed exchange rate of 1 ether when no RSETH supply exists i.e., no minted tokens are available. Consequently, the first deposit will...

ChainLink's latestAnswer is deprecated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Chainlink's documentation indicates that the latestAnswer function is deprecated. This function lacks reversion if no answer is obtained, instead returning 0. Additionally, the reported latestAnswer varies with 18 decimals for some token quotes and 8...

Mint amount calculation in deposit is incorrect

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The calculation in the deposit function of the DepositPool contract is flawed as it factors the deposited amount into the RSETH price to calculate the amount to mint. Impact When a user deposits in the DepositPool contract, the amount of RSETH to mint i...

rsETH can return incorrect price because of future EigenLayer strategies

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact How currently rsETH price is calculated? totalEthLocked is divided by rsETH supply. How totalEthLocked is calculated? It sums 3 amounts per every asset: 1 balance of LRTDepositPool.sol, 2 balance of all node delegators, 3 already deposited amount of asse...

Potential drain of EthCrowdFund contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the emergencyExecute function in the EthCrowdFundBase contract, the external call msg.value is decided by the user input which could lead to draining of funds by compromised wallet or human error. Also there is no check if the value of amoutnEth is at...

PartyGovernanceNFT.burn is not updating the totalVotingPower

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The getSharedProposalStorage.governanceValues.totalVotingPower value defines the voting power cap that can be minted using mint in PartyGovernanceNFT. In a previous version of the protocol 2023-05-party this variable was...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #246 [1699029716295]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 246 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-01 Use the factory constant address of the testnet Description import UNISWAPV3FACTORY, GOERLIUNISWAPV3FACTORY from '@script/Registry.s.sol'; contract UniV3Relayer is IBaseOracle, IUniV3Relayer // --- Registry ---...

Compromised minter can change route to misdirect user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The current security assumption revolves around the compromise of a minter, wherein they mint 200k USDe tokens for themselves and subsequently redeem them within the contract. Under this assumption, as long as the gatekeeper key remains secure, the minte...

Unchecked return value when calling ERC20's transfer function inside withdraw function of USDeSilo.sol. It is unsafe transfer of ERC20 tokens.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary In withdraw function of USDeSilo.sol there is one call calling ERC20 transfer function on USDe token. And it's return value neither checked nor safeTransfer of SafeERC20 used . So whenever transfer fails then it will not revert. And result in wrong...

ERC20 tokens can be incorrectly burnt because of insufficient validation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 tokens are incorrectly burnt. Proof of Concept In the file WildcatSanctionsEscrow.sol there is a constructor function: constructor sentinel = msg.sender; borrower, account, asset = WildcatSanctionsSentinelsentinel.tmpEscrowParams; Let's suppose thi...

Underflow can be occurred in codebase

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Because of the lack of the input validation, underflow can be occurred in the code. Proof of Concept function getRegisteredBorrowers uint256 start, uint256 end external view returns address memory arr uint256 len = borrowers.length; end = MathUtils.minen...

Borrower escapes delinquency penalty if no intermittent action happens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Once the market goes below required reserves, it is marked as delinquent only if an updateState action happens. Actions like market.updateState, executeWithdrawal, deposit, etc. have to happen else the protocol remains unaware of the market's delinquency...

OFAC sanctioned lender can frontrun nukeFromOrbit with a transfer of his funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In order to prevent a sanctioned lender for example by OFAC to poison an entire market, a function has been developed to block and transfer the sanctionned user's funds to an escrow contract. This escrow contract can be released if borrower decides so by...

Based on the functionality, if the releaseEscrow() function can be called by unauthorized entities, it can lead to potential misuse or unintended transfer of assets.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The absence of access control on the releaseEscrow function presents a significant security risk. As it currently stands, any external actor or contract can invoke this function, which may result in the unintended release of escrowed funds. This opens up...

Permanent DoS on Market Creation Failure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Permanent DoS of creating a market if anything fails in the market constructor. Within a create2 call, instead of failing when a revert occurs in the constructor being run, it just returns address0. If this occurs within a market that's being created the...

Incorrect Order of Operations in nukeFromOrbit Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the nukeFromOrbit function, the nonReentrant modifier is correctly applied. This means that the function cannot be reentered while it is already being executed the problem is that The blockAccountstate, accountAddress function is called before...

repayAllDebt joins system tokens to the proxy not to the Safe contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact repayAllDebt now calls joinSystemCoins with dest = addressthis, which in case a proxy makes a delegated call to this function will cause the user's tokens to be transferred to its proxy, then in CoinJoin.join it will transfer internal coins from CoinJoin...

When Creating a Safe Via ODSafeManager::openSAFE, the User Proxy Is Wrongly Set As the Safe Owner

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact We can observe from Vault721::mint function that the input usr in ODSafeManager::openSAFE function needs to be a previously built proxy of the user address. function mintaddress proxy, uint256 safeId external requiremsg.sender == addresssafeManager, 'V72...

[ADRIRO-NEW-H-03] Invalid operation in withdrawStuckTokens() will break CVX balance tracking in VotiumStrategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The updated code for withdrawStuckTokens contains an update to the trackedCvxBalance variable that will break CVX accounting in the VotiumStrategy contract, leading to multiple severe consequences. Impact To mitigate a potential withdrawal of CVX tokens...

Wrong WAD calculation in AccountingEngine contract leading to start auction with selling amount minimum 100 time bigger than expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the Math library, 1 WAD is equal to 1e18 which is assumed 1 For example: wmul2e18, 4e18 = 8e18 In AccountingEngine contract, the devs assumed that 1 WAD is equal to 0.01 1%, 100 WAD is equal to 1 100%. Hence, the function auctionSurplus will make star...

Compiler version used by Brahma contracts may introduce permanent bugs in the future

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of upgradeability of protocol to adapt with new pragma version may introduce a risk of being targeted by malicious actors if the pragma version 0.8.19 introduce bugs in the future. Here's the list of previous solidity compiler bugs for your referenc...

Same multiple delegate values result in wrong calculation of delegated votes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. If by mistake same delegate value is given multiple times to targets array then delegation of votes is wrongly calculated. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add...

token.transferFrom signaling failure by returning false may allow for funds to be stolen

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20MultiDelegate is expected to work with any ERC20-compliant tokens as long as they provide the same functionality and interface as ERC20Votes from OpenZeppelin. This makes it possible for ERC20MultiDelegate to work with a token that signals...

Possibility of losing users funds due to not checking for zero address (address 0x0)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As there is no function for checking whether the addresses of the sources and targets are zero or not in the delegateMulti function it may cause issues for users Sending tokens to a zero address address 0x0 is generally not a recommended practice in...

[M-14] Reentrancy in the RootBridgeAgent contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a Re-entrancy attack, a malicious contract calls back into the calling contract before the first invocation of the function is finished. This may cause the different invocations of the function to interact in undesirable ways, especially in cases wher...