LiquidityMining.claimConcentratedRewards() does not properly account user liquidity across ticks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Let’s say a user creates two separate positions, one is tick-15, tick and the second is tick, tick+15. The user is covering the entirety of the tick range to receive rewards but does not receive any. We see that posKey is defined like this: bytes32 posKey =...

No poolIdx validation; arbitrary values can corrupt storage, require validation.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact No validation on poolIdx input for key functions like claimConcentratedRewards. Could pass invalid poolId and corrupt storage. The claimConcentratedRewards function is defined on LiquidityMining.sol. It takes in a poolIdx as one of the parameters functio...

DoS in System Component lead to System Failure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Proof Of Concept Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps Assessed type DoS --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Potential Gas Limit Issue with Bulk Score Updates

Lines of code Vulnerability details The updateScores function, which updates scores for multiple users, uses a nested loop structure. This can lead to a situation where if the users array is large and each user has many markets to update, the function could run out of gas. Impact If the function...

Potential Fund Compromise via Malicious Token Insertion

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since any token can be sent to the PrimeLiquidityProvider contract there is a great chance of an attacker sending a scam token with some legit value in it to lure the owner making him sweep those tokens and by doing so compromising the whole contract's...

Functions in the VotiumStrategy contract are susceptible to sandwich attacks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description In VotiumStrategyCore.sol, the buyCvx and sellCvx functions call exchangeunderlying of Curve's ETH / CVX pool to buy and sell CVX respectively: VotiumStrategyCore.solL233-L240 ICrvEthPoolCVXETHCRVPOOLADDRESS.exchangeunderlying value: ethAmountIn...

Inflation attack in VotiumStrategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The VotiumStrategy contract is susceptible to the Inflation Attack, in which the first depositor can be front-runned by an attacker to steal their deposit. Impact Both AfEth and VotiumStrategy acts as vaults: accounts deposit some tokens and get back...

Lack of slippage protection for depositRewards() in AfEth.sol makes it susceptible to sandwich attacks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description In VotiumStrategyCore.sol, the buyCvx function calls exchangeunderlying of Curve's ETH / CVX pool to buy CVX: VotiumStrategyCore.solL233-L240 ICrvEthPoolCVXETHCRVPOOLADDRESS.exchangeunderlying value: ethAmountIn 0, 1, ethAmountIn, 0 // this is...

Not enough valid checks in the Factory.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The LiquidityPoolFactory contract is used to deploy LiquidityPools through a controlled newLiquidityPool , however a vital check is omitted. The newLiquidityPool is first called in the PoolManager.sol but it is not restricted to just that, it can also be...

Contract lacks proper error handling. Without meaningful error messages, it becomes difficult to identify the exact reasons for failures or unexpected behavior. Often leading end user astray.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Contract lacks proper error handling. Without meaningful error messages, it becomes difficult to identify the exact reasons for failures or unexpected behavior. Often leading end user astray. The code lacks proper error handling mechanisms, which can make it...

getActiveTickIndex returns wrong index

Lines of code Vulnerability details To find a tick that's above price ie its only underlying is the base token, getActiveTickIndex should not if baseTokenIsToken0 && amt0 == 0 || !baseTokenIsToken0 && amt0 == 0 return tickIndex; it should if baseTokenIsToken0 && amt1 == 0 || !baseTokenIsToken0 &&...

Incorrect use of getTokenAmounts causes getReserves / getTVL to be overestimated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Previously, getTVL counted the balance of TokenisableRange and multiplied it by the LP value. After reconstruction, getTVL obtains the balance of token0 and token1 through getTokenAmounts and multiplies the token value. The problem is that when calculati...

getActiveTickIndex implementation error

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The implementation of getActiveTickIndex is wrong, and the searched ticks do not meet expectations, causing funds to be incorrectly allocated to edge ticks, and there is basically no staking income. Proof of Concept // if base token is token0, ticks abov...

An attacker can use the flashloan function with an invalid collateral asset

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function flashloan - allows delegate token owner or approved operator to borrow their underlying tokens for the duration of a single atomic transaction. The function uses Structs.FlashInfo calldata info as an input parameter. Failure to call...

H-01 Unmitigated

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

Minted Shares would be Inflate Shares by 10000 due to Math Error in the wrap function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact BPSDENOMINATOR in the rUSDY.sol contract is an important variable used to scale up usdy amount - shares as noted in it comment description but it is only used to scale up when minting shares but not scaled down before subtracting it from total shares and...

No removal mechanism from blocklist, allowlist and sanctionsList

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rUSDY.sol has setBlocklist sets the blocklist address, setAllowlist sets the allowlist address, and setSanctionsList sets the sanctions list address functions: However, the mechanism for removing addresses from arrays is not implemented anywhere. Even in...

Discrepancy in Token Allowance After Rebase Events

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function returns the number of tokens that spender is allowed to spend on behalf of owner. However, in the context of tokens with rebase mechanisms, the owner's balance can dynamically change without explicit transactions. The described behavior might lead ...

Zero Redemption Amount in RdpxDecayingBonds Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The redeem function, as described, checks whether the assets to be redeemed assets are not zero. This check is in place to ensure that a user isn't redeeming a non-zero amount of rdpxAmount tokens in exchange for zero assets. Such a check is essential to...

Attacker can DOS the ability of the protocol to exercise their options

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When an option is ITM, the admin can call the settle function of the RdpxV2Core contract, which will call the settle function of the PerpetualAtlanticVault contract. This function checks that the WETH balance of the PerpetualAtlanticVaultLP contract is...

DOS in governance when voting after delegate

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The GovernorCountingOverridable::handleVoteOverrides function substracts the delegator vote weight from the total votes when the delegatee has already submited a vote. However, if the delegator's vote is greater than the current total vote the substracti...

BondManager.updateTranscoderWithFees wrong decimal multiplication. Function always revert due to underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details BondingManager.sol have 2 mathUtils libraries, MathUtils use 1e6 as precision while PreciseMathUtils use 1e27 as precision. Some variable use MathUtils while other use PreciseMathUtils which might cause confusion. It happen with treasuryRewardCutRate variable...

Overwriting rdpxAmount Without Checks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The decreaseAmount function, specifically the line bondsbondId.rdpxAmount = amount;. This vulnerability allows overwriting the rdpxAmount without any checks or backups, which can result in irreversible data loss. function decreaseAmount uint256 bondId,...

Slashing transcoders on violation should not effect the delegators who staked into such transcoders, delegators should continue to earn rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to violation of norms, when a transcoder is slashed and force to resign, the delegators who provided stake into such transcoder should not be effected. They delegators should be able to continue earning the rewards as they delegated their tokens to...

In BondingVotes.sol, clock() will not work properly for Arbitrum due to use of block.number

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In BondingVotes.sol, clock is set to match the current round and clock has been extensively used in onlyPastRounds, getVotes, delegates, checkpointBondingState, checkpointTotalActiveStake, getTotalActiveStakeAt, getBondingCheckpointAt and it is given as...

Invalid Error Reverts in Some Cases

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description: While reviewing the code, I noticed that there is a potential issue with the error revert conditions in the getPointGivenXandUtility and getPointGivenYandUtility functions. The error handling mechanism in these functions might not be functioning as...

MIN_PRICE_VALUE is incorrect

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The MINPRICEVALUE variable is being calculated based on 10^10 instead of the intended 10^12. As a result, the MINPRICEVALUE will be lower than expected with 2 decimal places precision, potentially allowing pxinit and pxfinal to be set lower than the...

Missing slippage protection in _swap()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Without slippage, If the price of the tokens changes significantly during the swap, it could result in a large slippage, causing users to lose a significant amount of funds. An attacker can watch the mempool and then using flash bots execute a sandwich...

Liquidity concentration rate is reduced by the use of timestamp instead of block number

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Liquidity concentration rate is reduced by the use of timestamp instead of block number Proof of Concept The document states that This primitive can passively update liquidity concentration over time. You can think of it like a hybrid between a Balancer...

Accounting for Fixed_Fee and Base_Fee twice leading to less amount or token recieved

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are multiple instances where fees is deducted twice. I will explain this with one function similar logic follows in other functions as well.So whenever the swapGivenInputAmount function is called by the user with inputAmount provided by the user th...

H-09 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Issue not mitigated About the problem In the report i have described some vaults that will not work in the designed system. Example of such vault will be any vault that has withdraw limit. In this case yieldVault.maxWithdraw call will not return actual amount o...

GaugeController.remove_gauge() may indefinitely trap user voting power

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users will permanently lose voting power equal to their power used to vote in the removed gauge unless the gauge is re-added and users re-vote to remove their voting power from the gauge. Proof of Concept GaugeController.sol does not have any function fo...

GaugeController` allows for quick vote and withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details This issue was identified in the original Curve Finance audit, finding ID TOB-CURVE-DAO-004. It remains unresolved in the mkt.market implementation, but was fixed in the Curve implementation. Impact A malicious voter is able to use full voting power for multipl...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #513 [1691698843467]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 513 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Issue 2 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

TokenisableRange.sol claimFee function allows more slippage than intended due to incorrect calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In TokenisableRange.sol, claimFee collects swap fees generated in uniswap and compound these fees by minting to Uniswap pool. During minting collected fees back in uniswap, slippage protection is conducted by comparing addedValue - a value based on added...

Missing flash loan initiator check allows attacker to open trades, close trades and steal funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The attacker can close trades, partially close trades and even steal funds. Proof of Concept The OptionsPositionManager.executeOperation function is called when a flash loan is made and it can only be called by the lendingPool. The wrong assumption by th...

Assets from the old step are not properly transferred to a new TR position

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The transferAssetsIntoStep function's intent is to serve two purposes: transferring aAssets to a target TR position and moving assets from an old step to a target TR position. However, in practice, assets removed from the old step are not integrated into...

cleanup() does not properly handle debt repayment

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The cleanup... function in the PositionManager.sol contract is used to deposit remaining users assets back to ROE, repaying debt if any. However the users debt will not be repaid if the user has debt leading to loss of funds for the lenders and the proje...

swapExactTokensForTokens and swapTokensForExactTokens in OptionsPositionManager.sol uses UniswapV2Router01 which doesn't exist on Arbitrum

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The functions swapExactTokensForTokens and swapTokensForExactTokens are using UniswapV2Router01 to make swaps in different functions like closeDebt, withdrawOptionAssets or swapTokens, but that would not be possible and those function would revert. Proof...

Some functions in TokenisableRange contracts does not allow user to deadline.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Not allowing users to supply their own deadline could potentially expose them to sandwich attacks Proof of Concept Consider the following scenario: if fee0 100 bal0 && fee1 100 bal1 TOKEN0.token.safeIncreaseAllowanceaddressPOSMGR, fee0;...

Malicious user can drain the Singularity contract of it's liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The SGLCollateral contract has functionality to allow users to remove and add collateral for the Singularity market. The addCollateral function accepts a skim parameter that, if defined as true, will cause the internal addTokens function to assert that t...

Risk of Incorrect Collateral Pricing in Case of Aggregator Reaching minAnswer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Chainlink aggregators have a built-in circuit breaker to prevent the price of an asset from deviating outside a predefined price range. This circuit breaker may cause the oracle to persistently return the minPrice instead of the actual asset price in the...

Attackers might be able to avoid calling reference modules when creating publications

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description When comment, mirror or quote is called on a publication with a reference module, the reference module will be called. For example, when a user mirrors another publication with a reference module, the processMirror function of that reference...

IF FEE ON TRANSFER TOKEN CONFIGURED AS THE VOTING TOKEN FOR THE VAULT, IT COULD INTRODUCE ACCOUNTING ERROR FOR VOTE COUNT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The NFTBoostVault.lockTokens function is used to transfer the ERC20 voting token of the vault and the ERC1155 NFT to the NFTBoostVault contract after accounting for their respective votes. The issue here is that a fee-on-transfer token could get selected...

Malicious actors could pass in huge arrays to disrupt service availability (DOS) in the updateVotingPower function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract is stopped from being usable by legitimate users if the attacker repeatedly spammed large arrays Proof of Concept The updateVotingPower function currently only checks that the array is = 50: While 50 may be a reasonable limit for normal usag...

loss of user funds in ARCDVestingVault.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the contract ARCDVestingVault.sol the function delegate is used to delegate user votes to desired address but it fails to maintain the sanity check if the provided address is a zeroaddress or not function delegateaddress to external...

Risk of Rogue Signer Control: Potential for Malicious Signer to Modify Threshold and Gain Unauthorized Control of Multisig Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The "Rotation of Signers" mechanism in the Multisig contract poses a risk of a single rogue or compromised signer gaining unauthorized control of the contract. If a signer with malicious intent or compromised credentials utilizes the rotateSigners...

Permit does not revert for tokens that do not implement it.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Callers should not rely on permit to revert for arbitrary tokens especially if permit is used as a security check. Tokens which do not revert on permit either do not implement it or have a non-reverting fallback function. Most notable among them is WETH...

No access control on mintYieldFee

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of access-control allows anyone to mint the yield fee to himself. Proof of Concept Vault.mintYieldFee does not restrict the recipient yield fees: function mintYieldFeeuint256 shares, address recipient external requireVaultCollateralized; if shares...

An identical vault can be deployed with existing values, the logic controlling this is missing

Lines of code Vulnerability details VaultFactory. The deployVault function deploys a new vault with 10 arguments, but does not check if there is a vault already deployed with the same arguments This seems to have been preferred as a design, but malicious people with copy safes can direct users to...