removeDelegation acts on wrong token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The function removeDelegationtokenId currently tries to remove tokenId from the list of tokens delegated to itself. The correct behavior would be to get which token tokenId is delegated to, and remove tokenId from the delegations to that token. Since...

Malicious user can cause complete loss of function in AxelarAuthWeighted.sol by matching validators and weights to a previous epoch

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Complete loss of function for both AxelarAuthWeighted.sol and AxelarGateway.sol Proof of Concept if epochForHashnewOperatorsHash 0 revert SameOperators; AxelarAuthWeighted.soltransferOperatorship reverts in L76 if epochForHashnewOperatorHash != 0. This...

Impossible to add ve in RewardDistributor

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Starting from ve == 0, we call addVoteEscrow. function addVoteEscrowaddress voteEscrow external onlyOwner if addressve == address0 ve = VEpendingVoteEscrow; else voteEscrowEnableDate = block.timestamp + 1 days; pendingVoteEscrow = voteEscrow; The functio...

The function _transferFrom doesn't work

Lines of code Vulnerability details In VoteEscrowDelegation.sol L242, the function removeDelegation is called externally with the syntax this., but that external call changes the msg.sender. So in the function removeDelegation, msg.sender will be the contract itself, not the user. But this functi...

Upgraded Q -> M from 268 [1659038665057]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 268 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: The protocol does not support fee on transfer and other weird tokens, e.g.: IERC20rewardToken.safeTransferFrommsg.sender, addressthis, amount; rewardTokenInforewardToken.queuedRewards += amount; --- The text was...

TEST

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the concept. Tools Used Recommended...

Reentrancy for function call before state update

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An external call "transfer" is made before updating state data through "setFuses" and "setFuses" does not depend on any data from "transfer". . Proof of Concept Reentrancy is not only an effect of Ether transfer but of any function call on another...

[PNM-002] The expiry of the parent node can be smaller than the one of a child node, violating the guarantee policy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description By design, the child node's expiry can only be extended up to the parent's current one. Adding these restrictions means that the ENS users only have to look at the name itself's fuses and expiry without traversing the hierarchy to understand what...

CHECK VALID ADDRESS for _auctionStarted

Lines of code%20internal%20virtual%20%7BL214 Vulnerability details Impact Should check for valid address before giving so it can revert if it isn't. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the...

Incorrect validation check results with always initial proportion to the liquidator.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The liquidator will get the initial proportion of value irrespective how long the time passed. Proof of Concept if duration == typeuint32.max in above condition check need to be checked with "elapsed" not with "duration" . Since it was mentioned that...

Liquidator cut is calculated incorrectly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can call payBase function to pay debt in return for collateral. But due to incorrect calculation User will obtain lesser collateral than what he should actually receive causing immediate permanent loss Proof of Concept 1. User calls payBase function...

Upgraded Q -> M from 358 [1657932899986]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 358 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

User can set auctioneer to address(0) to prevent vault from being liquidated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Vault cannot be liquidated Proof of Concept auction can be called with any address as the 'to' address. A majority of ERC20 tokens will revert if a transfer is initiated to address0, notably, including USDC. Since the auctioneer is paid each time a payme...

Attacker Can Front-run auction() To Modify Auctioneer Reward Receiver Address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can front-run the auctioneer’s call to auction with another address to to receive the auctioneer reward instead of the original caller. Proof of Concept 1. Alice wants to liquidate a specific vault. 2. Mallory observes Alice's auction...

Allowance should always larger or equal to the transferred amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Wrong operators are set. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates the concept. Line 111 - 115 if allowe...

MarketPlace - authRedeem does not work

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The redeem process looks broken, impacting one of the core functionality of the protocol. Proof of Concept The redeem process is the following: User calls redeem or withdraw in ZcToken, which forwards the call to MarketPlace, which calls...

Upgraded Q -> M from 417 [1657853118593]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 417 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Implementation does not exist

Lines of code fd36ce96b46943026cb2dfcb76dfa3f884f51c18/Marketplace/MarketPlace.solL156 Vulnerability details Impact ZcToken.withdraw and ZcToken.redeem will be reverted. Proof of Concept In ZcToken.withdraw and ZcToken.redeem, it calls redeemer.authRedeem. redeemer can be MarketPlace here. But...

Upgraded Q -> M from 390 [1657876456166]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 390 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> M from 277 [1657879288067]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 277 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> M from 163 [1657895636410]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 163 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

createCollectionFor doesn't transfer ownership to _controller that specified in the parameter.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact controller is supplied to the function parameter to be controller of the token and owner of the vault. But actually owner of the vault is VaultRegistry that can't control anything in the Vault. Proof of Concept function createCollectionFor bytes32...

buyoutPrice precision is lost in Buyout's start and Migration's commit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Buyout's start now determine the price for buyout with the truncation to 1% of supply. When buyout initiator brings in the big enough amount of fractional tokens current formula can yield substantial mispricing of initiator's fractional tokens value, which will...

Buyout griefing can block almost all functionalities

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Everyone can start a Buyout for a vault by paying only 1 wei. For the next 4 days no other Buyout can start. If someone is fast enough, they can start another griefing buyout as soon as one finishes, meaning that it's possible to block the functionality ...

CreateFor#JBProjects.sol is vulnerable to reentrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reentrancy attack can trick users by spamming incorrect project Id event emission Proof of Concept The function createFor which uses safeMint is lacking any form a reentrancy protection. OZ Safe Mint implementation is function safeMint address to, uint25...

oldToken.transferOwnership() to contract may be irreversible

Lines of code Vulnerability details oldToken.transferOwnership to contract may be irreversible Proof of Concept JBTokenStore.sol 265-266: if newOwner != address0 && oldToken != IJBTokenaddress0 oldToken.transferOwnershipprojectId, newOwner; OpenZeppelin library Ownerable.sol: function...

Counter offer is not implemented correctly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact acceptCounterOffer is not verifying if the original order has already been filled. In case maker makes a counter offer and by the time counter offer is called, some user has already filled the original order then both original and counter offer will be...

both order side positions don’t exist is not checked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The flow in fillOrder as documented in expects the check order side positions doesn't exist . However the fillOrder function does not have a require check for this. This allows for the same side positions to be created multiple times leading to loss of...

Fee is being deducted when Put is expired and not when it is exercised.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Fee is being deducted when Put is expired and not when it is exercised in PuttyV2.sol. Comment section of the setFee function mentions "fee rate that is applied on exercise" which signifies that the fee amount is meant to be deducted from strike only whe...

Orders could be unable to be fulfilled due to insufficient fund/underlying when when filled

Lines of code Vulnerability details Orders could be unable to be fulfilled due to insufficient fund/underlying when when filled Proof of Concept Let's say on day 1, Alice created a long call order for 5 ERC721 Bored Apesid1, id2, id3, id4, id5, with premium 2.5 ETH. But there will be a gap betwee...

Problems with the access control of the fillOrder() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. fillOrder does not check order.maker ! = caller, which means that mintorder.maker, uint256orderHash; & mintmsg.sender, positionId; can mint NFT to the same person and therefore may create unintended...

Returned Value not checked when Depositing Eth

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In fillorder function, when eth is converted to weth, at line 335, it deposit the msg.value here. But it does not check the return value if the call succeeded. Proof of Concept IWETHweth.depositvalue: msg.value; Tools Used Visual Studio Code Recommended...

Underlying asset price oracle for CToken in BaseV1-periphery is inaccuarte

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Underlying asset price oracle for CToken in BaseV1-periphery is inaccuarte Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that...

Unused deadline checker modifier may result in user fund loss due to unexpect transaction ordering (MEV)

Lines of code Vulne...

Upgraded G -> M from 49 [1656600225781]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 49 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

baseRatePerBlock not updated when a new base rate is set

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When an admin sets a new baseRatePerYear in setBaseRatePerYear, the baseRatePerBlock is not updated. If the deltaBlocks has not passed yet, it will also not be updated when getSupplyRate is called, i.e. a stale value will be returned there. Recommended...

Centralized mint

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The mint method is too centralized. Proof of Concept Using the mint function of ERC20MinterBurnerDecimals, the minter address can mint arbitrary amount of tokens. If the private key of the owner or minter address is compromised, the attacker will be able...

Upgraded G -> M from 84 [1656428843011]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 84 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> M from 115 [1656346004435]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 115 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> M from 194 [1656339935656]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 194 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> H from 207 [1656344605107]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 207 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Illuminate PT redeeming allows for burning from other accounts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Illuminate PT burns shares from a user supplied address account instead of user's account. With such a discrepancy a malicious user can burn all other's user shares by having the necessary shares on her balance, while burning them from everyone else. Setting th...

Fees should be paid by the user when lend() to Swivel

Lines of code Vulnerability details function lend uint8 p, address u, uint256 m, uint256 memory a, address y, Swivel.Order calldata o, Swivel.Components calldata s public unpausedp returns uint256 // lent represents the number of underlying tokens lent uint256 lent; // returned represents the...

Removal of liquidity from the reserve can be griefed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users may be unable to withdraw/remove their liquidity from the LiquidityReserve if a user decides to grief the contract. Proof of Concept This is the only function in this contract that is able to unstake funds, so that they can be withdrawn/removed:...

Griefing Attack by staking for any receipent

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any user can grief attack and lock funds of victim by staking with victim address as recipient. Proof of Concept If warmup period is more than 1, it is possible to do this by staking with victim address as recipient with 1 wei amount, and increasing the...

_rejectBuyout() does not take buys and sells into account until next block, can lead to false effects due to timing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Buyout that should be rejected will be allowed to happen. Proof of Concept Last user to call buy that could have pushed rejectBuyout to reject the buyout wont be accounted for because rejecBuyout is place before the minting of new tokens. Therefore even ...

[PNM-005] Reentrancy of function sell

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description In function chargeFee, a potential reetrancy can be triggered by the factory. Since function sell invokes chargeFee in the middle of its function body, it potentially impacts the calculation, e.g., the totalSupply would be incorrect since the tokens...

Ineffective TWAV Implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Background The current TWAV implementation consists of an array of 4 observations/valuations called twavObservations. Whenever, the new valuation is updated, the new cumulative valuation will be appended to the twavObservations array and the oldest...

REENTRANCY-Avoid transfer() as reentrancy mitigations. Transfer do not protect from reentrancies in case of gas price changes.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact --Check: reentrancy-unlimited-gas --Severity: Informational --Confidence: Medium Transfer and send have been recommended as a security best-practice to prevent reentrancy attacks because they only forward 2300 gas. That being said, gas repricing of...

sell() and buy() should not have whenNotPaused modifier

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Impacts are two fold: 1. admin should not be allowed to stop users from selling/cashing out their assets under any circumstance. 2. Due to poor timing or malicious admin activity, it could be the case that buy is put on pause right after initiateBuyout i...