Upgraded Q -> 2 from #643 [1704652543122]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 643 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-2 Setting Auction::reservePrice equal to 0 can create a chain of 0 price bids --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Missing Input Validation for Media Type

Lines of code Vulnerability details The validateMediaType function in the ArtPieceMetadata contract performs some input validation for the mediaType field in the metadata parameter. However, it lacks validation for the associated data fields based on the mediaType. This could lead to issues where...

Lack of receive() inside MoneyMarketHook contract when interacting with WNATIVE.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact MoneyMarketHook is expected to work with the native balance when interacting with WNATIVE, especially when params.returnNative is set to true during the execute operation. However, due to the lack of a receive function inside the contract, MoneyMarketHoo...

setPosMode should not allow changing the mode when the new mode's canRepay status is disabled

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the scenario where the mode's canRepay status is set to false, positions using that mode cannot be repaid and liquidated. However, users are allowed to change their position's mode to one where the canRepay status is currently set to false. This could...

setPosMode function doesn't check if wLp is whitelisted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Using setPosMode function owner of position can change it's mode. When the function is called, then there are a lot of checks, like if current mode allows to decollateralize and if new mode allows to collateralize. Also it's checked, that all...

The builderReferral, purchaseReferral and deployer can never be equal to address(0), which leads to the revolutionRewardRecipient stealing their rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details HIGH The builderReferral, purchaseReferral and deployer can never be equal to address0, which leads to the revolutionRewardRecipient stealing their rewards Description: revolutionRewardRecipient will receive the rewards of the builderReferral, purchaseReferral...

Missing access control on critical functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details The broad admin role enables arbitrary manipulation of the heap without restrictions. Recommendation: Implement granular access control and privilege separation. Implement an access control system such as OpenZeppelin AccessControl to restrict access to these...

Signature Verification for batchVoteForManyWithSig Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Potential Risk: The batchVoteForManyWithSig function in the CultureIndex contract allows multiple users to execute a batch of votes using provided signatures. While it attempts to verify the signatures, there are potential risks associated with signature...

If the borrower enters token blacklist, LP may never be able to retrieve Liquidity

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Currently, there are two ways to retrieve Liquidity 1. borrower actively close position : call closePosition 2. be forced liquidation leads to close position : liquidatePosition - closePosition No matter which one, if there is a profit in...

TRST-M-1 finding from previous audit still exists

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Issue TRST-M-1 from previous audit still exist. In order to calculate collateral amount getCollateralCreditCurrente36 function is used. uint tokenValuee36 = ILendingPoolpoolsi.toAmtCurrentsharesi tokenPricee36; tokenValuee36 is usd value of...

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...

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...

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...

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...

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...

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...

The protocol is susceptible to reentrancy attacks.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Reentrancy is a well know bug in smart contract and the protocol is not handling it, The safeMint function in ERC721 make a callback to the receiver checking if they can hold a nft, this can be used to a receiver to take control of the execution of the call. in...

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...

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...

asD TOKEN CREATOR CAN PROFIT UNFAIRLY FROM THE cNote TOKENS DIRECLTY TRANSFERRED TO THE asD.sol CONTRACT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The asD.withdrawCarry function is used to withdraw the interest that accrued in the asD contract in the form of NOTE tokens. Only the owner of the asD token is able to withdraw the interest accrued since the withdrawCarry is controlled by the onlyOwner...

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...

Users could game oracle price deviation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary Prices returned from Chainlink oracles have different conditions to update the reported values, which can be abused by Impact Prices for the different LST assets supported in the Kelp protocol are obtained from a Chainlink oracle. The data feeds for eac...

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...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #385 [1699689442074]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 385 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-04 ODSafeManager.allowSAFE function enables any allowed address to add/remove other allowed addresses Details The ODSafeManager.allowSAFE function is meant by design to allow/disallow any address to manage the safe...

Hosts should agree before performing operations like setting ragequit, vetoing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since a Party can have multiple hosts, they should agree before vetoing or setting rageQuit, to prevent a single compromised host from having absolute decision, just as is done when hosts accept a proposal Proof of Concept In PartyGovernanceveto and...

decreaseTotalVotingPower - If totalVotingPower becomes less than mintedVotingPower, the protocol crashes(even can lose assets)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If totalVotingPower getSharedProposalStorage.governanceValues.totalVotingPower -= votingPower; 1. Tak...

totalVotingPower is not being decreased in burn function in PartyGovernanceNFT.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In PartyGovernanceNFT.burn function, burnAndUpdateVotingPower is being used which will reduce the votingPower from the burned nft and the mintedVotingPower. The totalVotingPower should be explicitly decreased in burn function which was missing here...

In parties with more than one host, a single host can bypass the execution delay of a proposal by transferring his host status to other addresses of his.

Lines of code Vulnerability details The Vulnerability After a proposal has gathered enough votes to pass, it waits through a period defined in the governance values named executionDelay. That executionDelay period is bypassed and the proposal can be executed immediately if ALL hosts of the party...

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 ---...

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...

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...

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...

Usury from simple mistake

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A borrower making a simple mistake might be forced to pay an extortionate interest rate for en extended period of time. Severity rating I was hovering between Medium and High on this one. Medium because it is based on a user mistake. On the other hand, t...

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...

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...

M-07 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of M-07: Issue NOT fully mitigated with ERROR Mitigated issue M-07: Lack of access control and value validation in the reward flow exposes functions to public access The issue was that anyone can deposit rewards to AfEth, and that if AfEth or...

Price inflation pump

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact AfEth price can be inflated until severe rounding errors occur. Proof of concept Deposit in AfEth such that totalValue == 1 and thus 1 afEth is minted. Then AfEth.price will be in the open interval $1,2$ AfEth.price $= 1$ is extremely unlikely. Deposit i...

[ADRIRO-NEW-M-04] CVX tracking misses to account for rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The updated codebase now tracks CVX balances internally. While this is correctly handled in most operations, accounting fails to consider CVX tokens coming from claimed rewards. Impact CVX balances in the Votium strategy are now tracked internally. This...

TransactionValidator does not validate gas token address and gas price parameter when validating the transaction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact TransactionValidator does not validate gas token address and gas price parameter when validating the transaction Proof of Concept the safe transaction struct is listed below: struct SafeTransactionParams Enum.Operation operation; address from; address to...

ExecutorPlugin.executeTransaction() is prone to cross-chain replay attacks.

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function executeTransaction is used by executors to validate and execute transactions via a module transaction. the function takes in the input ExecutionRequest and does no validation of the msg.sender. therefore this creates an opening in which a malicious...

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...

Users may be unable to claim their rewards and add/remove liquidity due exceeding gas limit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user provides liquidity on ticks which are entered and exited a large number of times, the gas required to call the accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity can exceed the block gas limit. Proof of Concept The...

No access control on protocolCmd and userCmd; potential for abuse.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no access control on the protocolCmd and userCmd functions in LiquidityMiningPath. This means anyone can call them. There should be some checks to restrict access. The protocolCmd and userCmd functions are defined on LiquidityMiningPath.sol: /...

Lack of proper access restrictions on functions setConcRewards() and setAmbRewards()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract Reward distribution can be drained / manipulated Proof of Concept For setConcRewards and setAmbRewards, they are both lack of proper access restrictions, leads to the situation that anyone can execute these functions. This oversight presents a...