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...

Compute Type Determination

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The determineComputeType function reverts if the input and output tokens do not match expected pairs. This could lead to failed transactions if new token pairs are introduced without updating the function. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all...

Custom Ether Address Representation in Shell Protocol's Constructor

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The hardcoded custom representation of Ether in the Shell Protocol's adapter for the Curve Tricrypto pool using address0x4574686572, deviates from standard Ethereum practices and introduces the risk of address collisions. This could potentially lead to...

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...

Unbounded Approval

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The adapter may approve an unlimited amount of tokens to be spent by the Ocean protocol and the Curve pool, which could be risky if those contracts are compromised. Proof of Concept The adapter may approve an unlimited amount of tokens to be spent by the...

An attacker can manipulate the preDepositvePrice to steal from other users.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first user that stakes can manipulate the total supply of sfTokens and by doing so create a rounding error for each subsequent user. In the worst case, an attacker can steal all the funds of the next user. Proof of Concept When the first user enters...

Excess funds sent via msg.value not refunded

Lines of code 201 Vulnerability details 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:...

Unsafe use of transfer()/transferFrom() with IERC20

Lines of code 377, 509, 491, 530, 42, 50 Vulnerability details Impact Some tokens do not implement the ERC20 standard properly but are still accepted by most code that accepts ERC20 tokens. For example Tether USDT's transfer and transferFrom functions on L1 do not return booleans as the...

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...

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 Impact 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...

The owner is a single point of failure and a centralization risk

Lines of code 56, 109, 127, 172, 219, 250, 115, 131, 154, 116, 131https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapiocaz-audit/blob/bcf61f79464cfdc0484aa272f9f6e28d...

Unchecked cToken mint in mint() risks imbalance, breaking 1:1 peg reserve backing.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact mint does not check return code from cToken.mint. If minting fails, contract could have imbalance between cTokens and minted asD tokens. Attacker mints asD but underlying cToken mint fails. Result is loss of 1:1 peg backing. Proof of Concept In the mint...

Lost fees

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Buyers do not get any split of the fees. It is instead to be distributed to holders. But holder splits on successive buys are partially lost to the contract and cannot be recovered. Proof of concept The buyer's rewardsLastClaimedValueidmsg.sender is...

latestRoundData recommendation does not have consideration for stale price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue is highlighted in the bot L-2 finding but fail to highlight the importance for checking stale price. The ChainlinkPriceOracle when calls out to a Chainlink oracle receiving using the recommended latestRoundData it can get stale price, if there ...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #481 [1700080840600]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 481 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: A blocked/sanctioned account can still received interest --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

No way to withdraw from the strategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact NodeDelegator does not have any functions to withdraw the underlying from the strategy. It does have a function to transfer ERC-20 tokens to the LRTDepositPool, assuming the eigen layer strategy mints ERC20 tokens to represent the share of invested funds...

Missing pause checks in LRTOracle

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The LRTOracle oracle provides functionality to pause the contract but no restrictions are applied when the contract is in a paused state. Impact Similar to the other contracts in the protocol, the LRTOracle contract offers pausing functionality: 101: //...

Risk of Permanent ETH Loss for Bidders

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There's a risk of ETH becoming irretrievably locked in the contract if a bidder's address is a contract with either complex logic in its receive function or no receive function at all. In such cases, ETH transfers to these addresses could fail and result...

Winner of auction status is not set to false after claim so eligible for refund

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Bidders funds will get stuck Proof of Concept After Auction winner claims token, his/her status is not set to false so he is eligible for a refund because the refund logic checks for all indexes with status set to true, which not supposed to be so. So th...

Multiple instances of reentrancy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This can lead to massive loss of funds and asset in Nextgen. Proof of Concept There are multiple instances of reentrancy in NextGenCore.sol, MinterContract.sol and AuctionMemo.sol. These reentrancy is due to the use of ERC721 safeMint... for token transf...

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...

Attacker can take over and hijack any and every asset of a party initialized with the governance value distributionsRequireVote set to false, through the utilization of a flash loan.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Pre-requisite knowledge & an overview of the features in question 1. The distributionsRequireVote flag: The distributionsRequireVote flag is a governance value flag set to false by default in the governance values. It determines whether or not a party member ca...

members can get less funds out than they should have in a rageQuit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details: Details: the function getVotingPowerShareOf in PartyGovernanceNft get's the voting power share of a tokenId and it does that by dividing the voting power that nft has by the totalVotingPower: function getVotingPowerShareOfuint256 tokenId...

Users can lose eth when contributing.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When contributing in InitialETHCrowdfund, if minting adjusts the voting power for that user to cap it at totalVotingPower, the user does not get refunded the eth he lost. Proof of Concept PartyGovernanceNFTmint caps the mintedVotingPower at...

Host(s) + majority can steal assets of minority+other hosts without any option for minority(+otherhosts) to ragequit.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The ragequit functionality is put in place to protect the rights of the minority, who are not in support of a proposal, and allow them to withdraw their share of assets and exit the party. In some cases, minority will not have the opportunity to ragequit...

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...

Input validation for the fields within opts (like opts.name, opts.symbol, opts.voteDuration, etc.) is necessary to ensure they meet the expected criteria.

Lines of code Vulnerability details M3 - Input validation for the fields within opts like opts.name, opts.symbol, opts.voteDuration, etc. is necessary to ensure they meet the expected criteria. poc: solidity function createParty private returns Party requirebytesopts.name.length 0, "Party name is...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #593 [1699463205259]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 593 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: Prime.sol: Users with issued tokens can instantly re-enter the protocol if they were in the 90 days waiting period If an user is issued a prime token while waiting for the claim period, his stakedAt is not zeroed. If...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #193 [1699029806458]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 193 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Missing functions in the BasicActions to reach ODSafeManager Description Both functions allowing other users and handlers to manage the safe are restricted with access control. Only callable by the owner of the safe...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #221 [1699029747725]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 221 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 Handling missing for case where ERC20 token has decimal 18 in CamelotRelayer & UniV3Relayer oracles Description In the constructor token decimals of an ERC20 is assumed to be = 18 which can be wrong for some...

Shares Manipulation DoS Vulnerability in StakedUSDe

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The StakedUSDe contract is vulnerable to manipulation by a malicious actor, leading to a permanent interruption of operations through a Denial-of-Service DoS attack. This vulnerability also impacts StakedUSDeV2 due to its inheritance of the StakedUSDe...

Compromised minter can change route to misdirect user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The current security assumption revolves around the compromise of a minter, wherein they mint 200k USDe tokens for themselves and subsequently redeem them within the contract. Under this assumption, as long as the gatekeeper key remains secure, the minte...

A user with SOFT_RESTRICTED_STAKER_ROLE can earn yield.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any user blacklisted with SOFTRESTRICTEDSTAKERROLE role can earn yield by buying stUSDe token from open market and unstake stUSDe for USDe token on the StakedUSDeV2.sol contract. Proof of Concept The unstake function calls the internal withdraw function...

Single lender can game markets into unexpected states of delinquency

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Wildcat Markets allow for for a borrower to accept the risks they are willing to manage when agreeing to terms of uncollatoralised lending. Namely authorised borrowers will permit certain lenders and control certain market parameters like interest rate,...

potential griefing attack on deployMarket

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact potential griefing attack on deployMarket by malicious borrowers Proof of Concept when borrwer try to deployMarket , malicious borrower see paramenters of the deploymarket in transaction pool, take those parameters and deploy market by front runnning...

Borrower cannot change the maximum supply

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Maximum supply cannot be increased and by extension the max deposit limit too. Proof of Concept WildcatMarketConfig@setMaxTotalSupply is only callable by the WildcatMarketController but is not used anywhere there. WildcatMarketConfig.sol function...

Borrower escapes delinquency penalty if no intermittent action happens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Once the market goes below required reserves, it is marked as delinquent only if an updateState action happens. Actions like market.updateState, executeWithdrawal, deposit, etc. have to happen else the protocol remains unaware of the market's delinquency...

Early market adopters can force delinquency to game borrowers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When new markets are created, a lender can call WildcatMarket.updateState. This will trigger a call to WildcatMarketBase.writeState, the check on line 449 state.liquidityRequired totalAssets will return false since totalAssets starts as 0. This will...

An underflow occurred during the token transfer.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An underflow can occur during a token transfer when there is insufficient allowance. Proof of Concept function transferFrom address from, address to, uint256 amount external virtual nonReentrant returns bool uint256 allowed = allowancefrommsg.sender; //...

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...

M-08 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of M-08: Issue mitigated with ERROR Mitigated issue M-08: Inflation attack in VotiumStrategy The issue was that the price of afEth and of vAfEth could be inflated by donating underlying assets. Mitigation review Al...

H-01 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of H-01: Mitigation Error, see comments Link to Issue: code-423n4/2023-09-asymmetry-findings62 Comments The sponsor has provided a detailed response in the following comment: code-423n4/2023-09-asymmetry-findings62 comment In summary their analysis i...

Null VotiumStrategy deposits revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Deposits which attempt to deposit 0 in VotiumStrategy revert. Proof of concept The issue is similar to H-02: Zero amount withdrawals of SafEth or Votium will brick the withdraw process. Depositing in AfEth might call VotiumStrategy.deposit1 if the ratio ...

[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...

H-01 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of H-01: Issue NOT mitigated Mitigated issue H-01: Intrinsic arbitrage from price discrepancy The issue was that a price discrepancy between the exchange and oracle could be exploited within AfEth for an arbitrage. Mitigation review The maximum profi...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #1553 [1698130820647]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 1553 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: 3- Funds not transferred to correct recipient in RdpxDecayingBonds.emergencyWithdraw : Risk : Low The function RdpxDecayingBonds.emergencyWithdraw is used by the admin to pull funds from the contract in case of...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #854 [1697894788598]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 854 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Virtual Account cannot withdraw ERC1155 directly --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Insufficient validation of contracts when setting authorised address.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact governance can set Malicious contract as authorised address and since the AddressProvider.sol is a singular source of truth an attacker can craft an exploit to abuse authorizedAddress privileges. Proof of Concept A miniaturised POC is shown below. in the...

DoS issue presented in Brahma's latest audit still has potential control flow paths that can lead to same vulnerability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. Proof of Concept Following the "ConsoleAccount execTransaction" flow outlined via Brahma's Architecture diagram, as we can see: calling execTransaction calls checkTransaction function on...