Grief on transfers due to vestingStart during vesting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Past similar finding with the same severity: code-423n4/2022-05-runes-findings30 While centralization risk is acknowledged by the team & the C4udit tool: this may lead to loss of functionality grief. Proof of concept There is no requirement for the start...

purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT() may incorrectly returned the Auction funds to the liquidated user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact may incorrectly returned the Auction funds to the liquidated user in purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT, After someone purchases the auction NFT, the amount of the auction received will be distributed. In the existing logic, when the amount of the auction is...

Protocol faces truncation issue in some places due to solidity integer division

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact UniswapOracleFundingRateController.sol : periodRatio , targetMarkRatio - less multiplier output than the actual value that is possible. EDAPrice.sol: again the final outcome affects the multiplier. Please refer the code link in POC. PaprController.sol:...

Early NFT collections such as CryptoPunks and MoonCats can not be used as a collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Early NFT collections such as CryptoPunks, EtherRocks and MoonCats are not compliant with ERC721 standard. therefore, they can not be used as a collateral since transferring will fail. I beleive it would be a huge advantage for the protocol to support su...

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...

Oracle may return a stale price that is not resistant to flash crashes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Oracle may return a stale price in the event of a flash crash which will affect protocol calculation of maxDebt and affect protocol. Proof of Concept Protocol uses the time weighted average pricing of 30 days to check the price of the NFT. uint256 consta...

PaprController is vulnerable to reentrancy attacks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Malicious users can steal PAPR tokens through reentrancy attacks. Proof of Concept Function PaprController.purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT may trigger a reentrancy becase it calls ERC721.safeTransferFrom in NFTEDA.purchaseNFT:...

Unlimited minting of fractional tokens by calling Pair.wrap() multiple times

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can mint an unlimited amount of fractional tokens and break the protocol by selling the tokens. Proof of Concept NFTs can be traded for 1e18 fractional tokens by calling the function wrap. Wrap calls validateTokenIdstokenIds, proofs which in turn ru...

Loss of ETH for proposer when it is a contract that doesn't have fallback function.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description sendEthOrWeth is used in several locations in OptimisticListingSeaport: 1. rejectProposal - sent to proposer 2. rejectActive - sent to proposer 3. cash - sent to msg.sender This is the implementation of sendEthOrWeth: function...

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...

Attackers can obtain rewards through the NFT of the flash loan winning ID

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract judges whether the user has won a prize, but only judges whether the owner of the nft with the specified ID is equal to the user's address user == IERC721EnumerableUpgradeablesettings.drawingToken.ownerOf request.currentChosenTokenId ; But i...

Weak PRNG

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Weak PRNG due to a modulo on block.timestamp, now or blockhash. These can be influenced by miners to some extent so they should be avoided. src/VRFNFTRandomDraw.sol if settings.recoverTimelock block.timestamp + MONTHINSECONDS 12 revert...

Owners can delay the call to startDraw to reject the draw result

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owners can call lastResortTimelockOwnerClaimNFT to reclaim NFT back if settings.recoverTimelock block.timestamp // Stop the withdraw revert RECOVERYISNOTYETPOSSIBLE; ... If an owner delays the startDraw until settings.recoverTimelock, the owner can call...

DoS after creating 100 raffles under one subscriptionID

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user adds new consumer, function VRFCoordinatorV2::addConsumer is called: function addConsumeruint64 subId, address consumer external override onlySubOwnersubId nonReentrant // Already maxed, cannot add any more consumers. if...

Wrong position size calculation in TradingLibrary.pnl()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users will pay less closing fees than they should when they have a profitable short position. Also, they will pay more fees when they have a lost short position. Proof of Concept TradingLibrary.pnl calculates the new position size like below. function...

User may be blocked from market withdrawal for extended period of time

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact WithdrawalHook::lastUserPeriodReset is global for all users, which means that each time that lastUserPeriodReset + userPeriodLength it'is able to block user from withdrawal', async = let previousResetTimestamp = await getLastTimestampethers.provider //...

PrePOMarket.sol : a sender who is not included in the account list can front run and mint prior to setting the _mintHook

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact a sender who is not included in the account list can front run and mint prior to setting the mintHook. Proof of Concept The contract says, Minting will only be done by the team, and thus relies on the mintHook to enforce access controls. This is also why...

Anyone can set the accountList object

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setAccountList function which is the function that is responsible to set the account list object is made public with no access control on the AccountListCaller contract, Proof of Concept truffle console --networkId 555 compile attacker = "choose...

Redeem should revert if the TokenSender.sol doesn’t have enough outputtoken to reimburse to users.

Lines of code https://github.com/prepo-io/prepo-monorepo/blob/49a7ed94272db013245d9364e69be713a8aef0a2/apps/smart-contracts/core/contracts/TokenSender.solL41 Vulnerability details According to the comments in the code of RedeemHook.hook function : Once a market has ended, users can directly settl...

Value can be extracted from LPs

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Maverick allow liquidity to be moved based on TWAP to increase capital efficiency. However, the increased capital efficiency is not free. Consider a "right" move, the LP sell at lower price and move their liquidity to higher price, thus buying at higher...

Attacker can drain pool using executeBuyWithCredit with malicious marketplace payload.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description Paraspace supports leveraged purchases of NFTs through PoolMarketplace entry points. User calls buyWithCredit with marketplace, calldata to be sent to marketplace, and how many tokens to borrow. function buyWithCredit bytes32 marketplaceId, bytes...

Implementation can be self destruct by deployer, effectively break all running sale and lock all assets.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Sale in Escher is deployed using minimal proxy pattern, where there is only 1 implementation contract is deployed to save deployment gas. Also, in Open Edition and FixedPrice sale, when sale is not started yet, owner can cancel it, self destruct the prox...

Anyone can prevent themselves from being liquidated as long as they hold one of the supported NFTs

Lines of code Vulnerability details Contrary to what the function comments say, removeFeeder is able to be called by anyone, not just the owner. By removing all feeders i.e. floor twap price oracle keepers, a malicious user can cause all queries for the price of NFTs reliant on the NFTFloorOracle...

Not possible to finish LPDA after endTime

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details The only way to finish the sale is when newId == temp.finalId, making not possible to finish LPDA even if the endTime is already over POC There isn't any function to finalize the LPDA sale even if already finished the sale, the only way to...

fee distribution is only for the msg.to contract, instead of the to address of the call traces, which is not reasonable for the gas economic system.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The target contract of the fee distribution is got by contract := msg.To in the evmhooks.go . So the fee distribution is only for the msg.to contract, instead of the to address of the call traces. It means that any one use a contract wallet or setup a...

Wrong comparison

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...

NameWrapper: Cannot prevent transfer while upgrade even with CANNOT_TRANSFER fuse regardless of the upgraded NameWrapper's implementation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Upon upgrade to a new NameWrapper contract, owner of the node will be set to the given wrappedOwner. Since the node will be burned before calling the upgraded NameWrapper, the upgraded NameWrapper cannot check the old owner. Therefore, no matter the...

isContract might return false for the contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Turnstile contract's register function assumes the msg.sender is a smart contract. The validation of this is carried out in eventhandler.go's ValidateContract function. ValidateContract checks whether the address has an emptyCodeHash which is zero...

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,...

Cross-functional re-entrancy resulting in stealing any additional/extra ether sent by the execute() 's caller

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract Exchange.sol has execute function which can be called by anyone to execute a single buy and sell order. The function calls execute then returnDust. The latter sends the unrequired ether back to the caller. However, a malicious actor could...

Reentrancy attack on fee transferring

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description There is execute function in the Exchange smart contract. The function matches two orders, ensuring the validity of the match, transfers the order fees, etc. When transferring fees, the contract just makes a call to the...

A malicious user can steal all the excess balance on the pool by calling the execute function with higher amount than the selling amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When an order is matched, the Buyer has the option to pay in either ETH, WETH or via the Pool contract. The Exchange smart contract implements a function returnDust which returns the extra ETH to the user, if she overpays. The function is implemented in...

#bulkExecute() can reenter to steal funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ExchangebulkExecute can reenter, and internal execution of delegatecall is allowed to fail, not revert, malicious users can reenter to steal funds Proof of Concept Assumptions: There is a malicious user alice,with NFT for sale, paid through eth If user b...

Susceptible to reorg attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When reorg happens, it is possible that the cancelled order by the taker be executed by the maker. Proof of Concept Suppose userA is seller and userB is buyer, seller is maker, and buyer is taker. After some time, userB the buyer cancels the order by...

_returnETHIfAny() can silently fail, leading to an originator not getting the expected refund

Lines of code Vulnerability details The execute function refunds the unused ETH back to the originator through returnETHIfAny. This internal function uses a low-level call to transfer the ETH. The issue is that the return value of the call is not checked. As per the Solidity documentation...

The attacker can steal the ETH of users that wanted to buy an NFT by sandwiching the victim transaction.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The attacker can steal the ETH of users that wanted to buy an NFT by sandwiching the victim transaction. Proof of Concept In non-atomic some of the orders could fail and funds should return and the end of execute function - . But the returnETHIfAny...

Upgraded Q -> M from #43 [1668210521611]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 43 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Q-02 - Huge trust assumption in recoverErc20 Reward tokens are transferred into this contract when a pledge is created. The comment notes " Recovers ERC2O tokens sent by mistake to the contract", but this function can...

Chainlink USD price feeds can have more than 8 decimals

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Collateral value is overestimated by orders of magnitude if asset that has a chainlink oracle USD price feed with more than 8 decimals is added. A borrower can borrow much more than allowed in an EscrowedLine Proof of Concept In Oracle.sol the USD price...

1) THERE IS CONFLICT IN REQUIRE STATMENT. IN finalizeDeposit FUNCTION CHECKS require (msg.sender == l1Bridge, "mq"). IN bridgeMint FUNCTION IMPLEMENTATIONS onlyBridge Modifier CHECKS require(msg.sender == l2Bridge).

Lines of code Vulnerability details 1. Impact Let assume if we calling bridgeMint from finalizeDeposit function the msg.sender is l1bridge . if the msg.sender is not l1bridge can't run the finalizeDeposit but as per bridgeMint the msg.sender should be l2bridge. So it will cause the conflict . the...

No Allowlist For Bridgeable ERC-20 Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details We noticed that the deposit function of the L1ERC20Bridge contract code snippet 1 permits a user to bridge any ERC-20 tokens including deflationary and rebase tokens from the L1 to the L2 network. We considered that permitting non-standard...

[PNM-001] finalize with malicious input may allow multiple calls leading to fund draining

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The finalize function of the contract SizeSealed is used to finalize an auction, allowing the auctioner or seller to be paid quote tokens and also eventually allowing successful bidders to withdraw base tokens. Once the finalize function is called,...

A total of 3 risks: one with imperfect concurrency judgment logic, one with unrobust business logic, and one with unreasonable timestamp settings

Lines of code Vulnerability details RISK 1: When creating an auction, if the exact same token is transferred to the contract in a very short period of time, it will cause one of the auctions to fail to be created. is caused by the following statement: if balanceAfterTransfer - balanceBeforeTransf...

quoteToken could be fee-on-transfer token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens could have fees for each transfer, they are known as "fee-on-transfer" tokens. While there is a check inside createAuction function that prevents these tokens from being baseToken, FoT tokens still allowed to be quoteToken which could...

Attacker can take all the winnings and fill up the bids and cause loss of funds or dos

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can fill up all the bids and steal and be the winner and cause a dos and then withdraw/refund the funds since when doing a refund the bid isn't taken off the array an attacker can make 1000 bids and cause dos and have 100 percent chance of winni...

seller can change lowestBaseand lowestQuote and the seller can make it diffrent values causing a dos or loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When I a seller finalizes the auction they change the lowestQuote and lowestBase.When users withdraw from the auction after the auction is finalized. QuoteBought is calculated with the new amounts which can cause dos or refund their leftover quote amount...

Protocol won’t work with rebasing tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Some tokens may make arbitrary balance modifications outside of transfers e.g. Ampleforth style rebasing tokens, Compound style airdrops of governance tokens, mintable / burnable tokens. If such a token as used, since in the protocol we cache t...

reentrancyGuardInitializer modifier used on constructor and Initialize functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. In L1ERC20Bridge.sol there are two places where the reentrancyGuardInitializer modifier is used. It's found on both the constructor function and also on the initialize function. This is a problem becaus...

Approve front-running attack in DBR.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker could front-run an approve transaction to get an overall bigger amount approved. Proof of Concept This is the approve function of the DBR token. function approveaddress spender, uint256 amount public virtual returns bool...

If a market with a collateral that has feedDecimals + tokenDecimals > 36 is added it won’t be functional

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Chainlink price feeds usually have 18 decimals, but this is not guaranteed. Also tokens usually have 18 decimals or less but this is also not the case for 100% of widely used tokens YAM-v2 has 24. So the normal use case is when both the feed an...

Malicious owner can steal reward tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details The recoverERC20 function allows the contract owner to transfer arbitrary ERC20 tokens owned by the WardenPledge contract in order to recover tokens sent by mistake to the contract. In order to protect against withdrawal of deposited reward tokens, it includes ...