Liquidation logic is incorrect in some conditions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Because purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT function clears remaining debt of debtor if he has no more collateral, it's possible that when 2 auctions exists in same time, liquidation logic will not work properly and debt will be nullified before last auction i...

Borrowers don’t need to run the risk of being liquidated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Borrowers are able to borrow Papr, swap it for another asset in Uniswap without ever having to pay their debt because they can remove their collateral without paying their debt. Ultimately leading to free assets at the cost of others. Proof of Concept As...

NFT operators of OpenZeppelin-based NFTs can issue debt

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The Papr protocol allows NFT owners to issue debt against NFTs they deposit, denominated in papr. The solmate contracts that are used as imports for the project do not allow an operator on the NFT to participate in debt-creation; the ERC721 contract...

Pair.sol can be manipulated to affect small liquidity providers.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first minter can manipulate the supply of LP tokens and baseToken-fractional ratio, hindering small liquidity providers from interacting with the pair. A malicious actor can mint 1wei of LP token from a new pair, then proceed to transfer baseToken to...

Invalid tokens can be added to the pair

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact merkleRoot is a bytes32 and it is compared to bytes230 which makes it possible for a non-zero merkleRoot to be set in the constructor and yet still all tokens will be declared as valid Proof of Concept Tools Used Manual Audit Recommended Mitigation Steps...

Pair.sol contract is susceptible to having its pricing curve (x*y = k) manipulated through a 3rd party contract calling selfdestruct() and forwarding ether.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a pair is denominated in ether, a third party contract can forward ether to the contract using the selfdestruct function passing the pair's address. The impact of this is that the pair will allow its market making curve to be manipulated. Among other...

Possible Reentrancy Vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Add function, in case of non Eth Base Token, LP Tokens are minted for LP Provider before transferring the Base Token from Provider to Contract. In remove function, Fractional Tokens are Transferred to LP Provider before Burning the LP Token. In wrap...

Attacker can DOS OptimisticListing with very low cost

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The only check on a new proposal is that it is priced lower than the existing proposal. It does not constrain on the collateral supplied except it will revert in verifyBalance if set to 0. Anyone can block normal proposal creation by creating a proposal...

Price manipulation if baseToken have transfer hook

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Pair calculate the price by dividing the fractional token reserve with base token reserve. If the token have a before transfer hook, there would be a time where the fractional token reserves changed but the base token reserve have not, where the executio...

Upgraded Q -> M from #334 [1671456734920]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 334 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Collateral.withdraw allows the manager to withdraw an arbitrary amount of baseToken from Collateral. The only check is in the ManagerWithdrawHook.hook call, where it checks the withdrawal does not drop the amount of...

## MALICIOUS OWNER CAN CLOSE AND WITHDRAW AS HE WANT

Lines of code Vulnerability details MALICIOUS OWNER CAN CLOSE AND WITHDRAW AS HE WANT These functions below are set some emergency scenarios. But caviar.Owner able to triggered these functions as he want. Need to set some require statement in order to actually check these scenarios before his...

Attacker can make group pay for tokenID that is not intended.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description purchase in GroupBuy.sol executes the purchase call for the group. There are two possibilities for which tokenIDs can be bought in GroupBuy: 1. If the group is for a specific NFT, the tokenID is the value in pool.merkleRoot variable. 2. If the group...

Reentrancy in GroupBuy.purchase allows buying NFT twice

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In GroupBuy.purchase, poolInfopoolId.success which prevents buying the same NFT again is only set to true after the sale was executed. This can be exploited by reentering in the following line: address vault = IMarketBuyermarket.executevalue:...

Use of resignOwnership can lead to stuck NFT in contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract OwnableUpgradeable has a resignOwnership function that, if called, can potentially cause the loss of the NFT after a draw has been started. Proof of Concept These are the steps/conditions that make this issue happen: When the owner calls...

Unchecked setters

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorrect data: If the 'referred' or 'protocol' variables are set to incorrect values, it could result in incorrect or unexpected behavior in the contract. Manipulation: Malicious actors could potentially exploit this vulnerability to manipulate the syst...

Wrong calculation of MONTH_IN_SECONDS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Wrong calculation of MONTHINSECONDS : line 33 on VRFNFTRandomDraw.sol is calculating 30 weeks of 7 days instead of 30 days. 30 weeks of 7 days = 3600 24 7 30. 30 days = 3600 24 30. so and wont work properly --- The text was updated successfully, but these error...

Malicious drawingToken can make bad actor claim the raffle NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Malicious drawingToken address passed into factory.makeNewDraw can claim the raffle NFT. It can be exploited via a social engineering attack or another scenario is that a malicious owner can pretend to make a raffle with a malicious drawingToken and...

Function fulfillRandomWords in VRFNFTRandomDraw contract must not revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details The VRFNFTRandomDraw contract implements the Chainlink VFR feature to pull random data to select the raffle winner. As per their security guidelines the implementation of the fulfillRandomWords function must not revert. Impact If the fulfillRandomWords function...

_priceData.price is not verified in _limitClose

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function limitClose from the TradingExtension contract the priceData.price is not verified with the getVerifiedPrice function instead its value is directly used, and because the the getVerifiedPrice internally calls the function...

Attacker can set anyone as the tokenSender role

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setTokenSender function which is the function that is responsible to set the token sender role is made public with no access control, which makes attacker escalate his privileges to the token sender role Proof of Concept truffle console --networkId 5...

Ability to redeem excess collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details redeem of PrePOMarket.sol redeems long and short tokens in exchange for collateral tokens. Long and short tokens are default ERC20 tokens with 18 decimals, while the collateral ERC20 token uses the decimals of the underlying base token. Th...

In WithdrawHook.hook(), withdraw limits can be bypassed.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In WithdrawHook.hook, withdraw limits can be bypassed. As a result, users might withdraw more amount of the base token at a time than they should. Proof of Concept WithdrawHook.hook checks the withdraw limits like below. if lastGlobalPeriodReset +...

Misconfigured or malicious MANAGER Can drain, lose or steal ALL of the collateral.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Collateral.sol allows withdrawal of funds to an arbitrary manager account. There are no inherent limitation to: 1. identity of manager address 2. withdrawable amount Details of 1. : manager setter is access controlled still may be misconfigured or a...

Unsafe downcasting in TWA.sol truncate TWAP price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unsafe casting operation in TWA.sol truncation price. Proof of Concept the pool relies on the TWAP price to function properly, however, the code in TWA.sol sliently downcasting the price, which can truncate the price and affect user's trading unexpectedl...

Rewards are not accounted for properly in NTokenApeStaking contracts, limiting user's collateral.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description ApeStakingLogic.sol implements the logic for staking ape coins through the NTokenApeStaking NFT. getTokenIdStakingAmount is an important function which returns the entire stake amount mapping for a specific BAYC / MAYC NFT. function...

MarketplaceLogic.sol doesn't support ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details MarketplaceLogic.sol doesn't support ERC20 Tokens with fee on transfer Summary There are ERC20 tokens with transfer at fees. For checking if the transferred amount is the same as expected, code already compares balanceOf before and balanceOf after transfer...

Dutch auction getPrice() formula can lead to price reaching 0 and eventually reverting and locking the function.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function getPrice the current price is calculated by taking the start price and subtracting the product of dropPersecond and time elapsed. start price - dropPreSecond timeElapsed. The issue with this is that given the right inputs for dropPerSecon...

NFTFloorOracle's asset and feeder structures can be corrupted

Lines of code Vulnerability details NFTFloorOracle's addAsset and addFeeder truncate the assets and feeders arrays indices to 255, both using uint8 index field in the corresponding structures and performing uint8assets.length - 1 truncation on the new element addition. 2^8 - 1 looks to be too tig...

Users can lose funds if they call buy with _amount larger than type(uint48).max.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function buy take amount of type uint256 as input. amount is used to check if msg.value is correct depending on the sale price as follows: requireamount sale.price == msg.value, "WRONG PRICE"; but is not casted to uint48 as done to calculate the newI...

finalise() lacks authenticate calls to this method as anyone can access it.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unprotected call to a function sending Ether to an arbitrary address. This can be exploited by attackers . Proof of Concept function finalize public Sale memory temp = sale; requireblock.number = temp.endTime, "TOO SOON";...

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...

Upgraded Q -> M from #454 [1670445333683]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 454 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑01 Don't use payable.transfer/payable.send The use of payable.transfer is heavily frowned upon because it can lead to the locking of funds. The transfer call requires that the recipient is either an EOA account, or...

Upgraded Q -> M from #35 [1670345543949]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 35 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: No. 2 Any smart contract that uses transfer or send is taking a hard dependency on gas costs by forwarding a fixed amount of gas: 2300. If gas costs are subject to change, then smart contracts can’t depend on any...

Relayer/executor-already-set Error in CrossChainRelayerArbitrum Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The setExecutor function in the CrossChainRelayerArbitrum contract improperly reverts when the executor variable has already been set. Impact This bug could prevent the CrossChainRelayerArbitrum contract from properly setting the executor variable,...

CrossChainExecutorPolygon does not implement the executeCalls function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The CrossChainExecutor contracts in the codebase are meant to follow the CrossChainExecutor interface as defined in EIP-5164. Each L2 network specific CrossChainExecutor contract is also expected to inherit and follow the ICrossChainExecutor interface...

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...

The _recipient address has no limits to the amount of tokenID (NFTs) it can own

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since the recipient address has no limit to the number of tokenIds it can hold, this makes it possible for an attacker to call the register function many times with different addresses and send many tokenIds to the same recipient, which could cause a...

Allowance underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact I think the following check is unnecessary but furthermore, there should be a comparison if the allowance amount allowed is equal or greater than shares amount. Otherwise, we would end up with underflow of the uint value Proof of Concept Tools Used Manua...

MINTING OF NFT AT WILL

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact register is an unrestricted public function where any new msg.sender is going to get through the modifier onlyUnregistered. With a non-zero recipient argument passed into the function, a new NFT is going to be minted to the recipient. Consequently, an...

Possible lost msg.value in function distributeFees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Author: rotcivegaf Impact The function distributeFees don't checks if the tokenId exists and if the owner send value to the an non-exists tokenId, this one will stuck in the contract until the tokenId will minted, and take by the owner of the minted token that...

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...

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,...

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...

Unchecked transfer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The return value of an external transfer/transferFrom call is not checked Proof of Concept you can check Vulnerability in code here: Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps Use SafeERC20, or ensure that the transfer/transferFrom return value is checked...

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...

bringUnusedETHBackIntoGiantPool in GiantMevAndFeesPool can be used to steal LPTokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact real LPTokens can be transferred out of GiantMevAndFeesPool through fake stakingFundsVaults provided by an attacker. Proof of Concept bringUnusedETHBackIntoGiantPool takes in stakingFundsVaults, oldLPTokens, newLPTokens and rotate amounts from old to new...

Upgraded Q -> M from #449 [1668465467675]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 449 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: FlashLoanFee should be bounded | Low | 1 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

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...

Public to all funds escape

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The LooksRareAggregator smart contract implements a bunch of functions to escape funds by the contract owner see rescueETH, rescueERC20, rescueERC721, and rescueERC1155. In this way, any funds that were accidentally sent to the contract or were lock...