Missing msg.value when executing the cross-chain request

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the cross-chain request will not support smart contract that requires ETH payment in destination chain on execution side. Proof of Concept When a user relayers call and performs a cross-chain request, the executor needs to execute the request in the...

Potential reentrancy attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a potential of reentrancy attack in executeCalls in EthereumToArbitrumExecutor.sol since CallLib is making an external call with its executeCalls and we do not know the implementation of the contract that will be called eventually. The same issu...

[ZZ-004] During the deprecation period where both .eth registrar controllers are active, a crafted hack can be launched and cause the same malicious consequences of [ZZ-001] even if [ZZ-001] is properly fixed

Severity: High Status: Has not been reported Description, Specifically, according to the documentation, there will be a deprecation period that two types of .eth registrar controllers are active. Names can be registered as normal using the current .eth registrar controller. However, the new .eth...

First depositor who is a whale account can deny later depositors who are smaller accounts from using AutoPxGmx contract, such as for depositing GMX for apxGMX

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A whale account that owns a lot of GMX can call the following PirexGmx.depositGmx function to deposit much GMX for pxGMX. As the first depositor for the AutoPxGmx contract, this account can then call the AutoPxGmx.depositGmx function to deposit 1 wei GMX...

Steal deposit fund in ERC4626 vault by exchange rate manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Although the PirexERC4626 and AutoPxGlp contract check for 0 shares, the rounding down error can still be used to steal new user deposit. Part of the new deposit could be stolen. The attacker may monitor the pool activities to catch the steal...

Lack Of Proper Access Control Might Lead To User Getting Lesser Rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact We can call the function userAccrue for some other user and make their rewards lesser then they expect. In the function it calculates the rewards for a user that are being accrued over a period of time. The math to calculate how much reward a user has...

Need to check the _mint() status before increment the token count .

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Its possible to increase the tokenIdTracker even mint function failed. The mint status must be checked before increment tokenIdTracker value . Proof of Concept function registeraddress recipient public onlyUnregistered returns uint256 tokenId address...

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...

Nonce is not updated after EVM Transaction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It was observed that nonce is not updated while performing the EVM transaction. This could lead to Replay attacks Proof of Concept 1. Observe the CallEVM function func k Keeper CallEVM ctx sdk.Context, from common.Address, to common.Address, amount...

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...

The setupExecution is reentrancy attack vulnerable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setupExecution can be re-entered by calling bulkExecute inside an execution. Because the global state remainingETH and isInternal are modified reset to 0 and flase after the latter reentrant call, the previous call is affected: 1. all subsequent...

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...

Upgraded Q -> M from #334 [1668467418003]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 334 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: 2. Rug vectors by the owner A malicious owner can call setLBPairImplementation, setFeeRecipient, setFlashLoanFee , setFeesParameters and forceDecay to advantage himself at expenses of the users...

#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...

Broken Upgradable Logic in Pool.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Pool smart contract allows a user to predeposit ETH so that it can be used when a seller takes their bid. It uses an ERC1967 proxy pattern and only the exchange contract is permitted to make transfers. The smart contract inherits the...

Seller can steal ETH which is for other orders of the bulk

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The 'bulkExecute' and 'returnDust' functions are susceptible to reentrancy attack. Seller can exploit it to steal ETH which is for other orders of the bulk. Proof of Concept Key steps for successful attack 1 set fee rate to 100% 2 reentrancy call...

internalCall modifier can be circumvented with execute / bulkExecute

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The internalCall modifier ensures that public functions can only be called from another public function and not directly. It is implemented like that: modifier internalCall requireisInternal, "This function should not be called directly"; ; The modifier...

Potential DoS when closing a credit nominated in ETH in the LineOfCredit contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details When closing a credit that was issued in ETH, the LineOfCredit contract will send the lender his deposit and any accrued interests using the address.transferamount function, which may fail and revert the whole function, leading to an eventual DoS. Impact The...

The execute() function of SeaportProxy.sol will always fail.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. While L69 of SeaportProxy.sol is successful in preventing the function being called by a contract other than the LooksRareAggregator, unfortunately, the current implementation will fail the calling from...

Refinalization with theft of funds from other auctions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description There is a finalize function in the SizeSealed smart contract. The function traverses the array of the bids sorted by price descending. There is a prevention of the refinalization by the modifier atStateidToAuctionauctionId,...

A bidder can buy baseToken with low price by exploiting the DOS prevention measure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In order to prevent DOS attacks, the smart contract introduces a measure that limits the number of bids on an auction SizeSealed.solL157-L159. However, an attacker/bidder can exploit this measure to block others to place bids so that the attacker can buy...

Hacker can front-run the L2 ERC20 token deployment.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact hacker can front-run the L2 ERC20 token deployment to block L2 ERC20 token finalizeDeposit Proof of Concept I intend to prove this piece of code is front-runnable by hacker: /// @notice Finalize the deposit and mint funds /// @param l1Sender The account...

SimpleERC20Escrow's initialize() can be frontrun

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user's collateral is not held in the market contract but is instead held in individual escrows. Every user has a unique escrow for every market. And the escrow contracts are created via the Market contract's createEscrow function. And it's initialize...

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...

Oracle Price Calculation will Return Wrong Price for Certain Tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact viewPrice and getPrice functions of Oracle.sol has wrong price calculation implementation and so it will return wrong price for certain tokens. It only works well for tokens that has 18 decimals. This is because of hard-coded "36" in these functions line...

The decimal calculation is wrong for tokens with decimals < 18, it will highly inflate the price.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The decimal calculation is wrong for tokens with decimals 18, it will highly inflate the price. Every function that uses oracle price such as borrow and liquidation will be wrong for tokens with decimals 18. Proof of Concept uint8 decimals = 36 -...

Divide before multiply

Lines of code Vulnerability details division before multiply Impact Solidity integer division might truncate. As a result, performing multiplication before division can sometimes avoid loss of precision. Proof of Concept In general, this is a problem due to precision. In this case, it also affect...

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...

A single point of failure is not acceptable for this project

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The pause function on WardenPledge.sol has a single point of failure and onlyOwner can stop all project. Owner is not behind a multisig and changes are not behind a timelock.This information hasnt got in documents Even if protocol admins/developers are n...

Voting Power double count when the pledge.receiver delegates to their own pledge.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a pledge is created via the createPledge function, the pledge creator is allowed to select the receiver address which will receive the boost delegation. Additionally, targetVotes parametr is selected which is the maximum target of votes the receiver...

_pledge function has mathematical calculation error

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the mathematical formula is incorrect, which will lead to protocol insolvency Proof of Concept the original code is : uint256 slope = amount / boostDuration; uint256 bias = slope boostDuration; // Rewards are set in the Pledge as reward/veToken/sec // To...

Pseudo randomness is not recommended

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Use of pseudo randomness in chain is not recommended as it can be predicted by anyone, this can affect value in case of minting or withdrawing in some scenarios Proof of Concept Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps Use oracles --- The text was updated...

_payoutEth() calculates balance with an offset, always leaving dust ETH in the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Payout recipients can call getEthPayout to transfer the ETH balance of the contract to all payout recipients. This function makes an internal call to payoutEth, which sends the payment to the recipients based on their associated bp The issue is that the balance...

Missing support of non-standart ERC20

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description In functions of PA1D and HolographOperator contracts there is logic relying on the fact that tokens implemented ERC20 standard especially, that transfer and transferFrom functions of the tokens returns bool result. But in...

Upgraded Q -> M from 796 [1666363133014]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 796 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑01 Use of transferFrom rather than safeTransferFrom for NFTs in will lead to the loss of NFTs The EIP-721 standard says the following about transferFrom: /// @notice Transfer ownership of an NFT -- THE CALLER ...

Upgraded Q -> M from 211 [1665775603120]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 211 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Permanent lockup of tokens without recovery possible

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The callhook for whitelisted contracts adds an additional layer of complexity that can have multiple points of failure. If the execution of L2GraphTokenGateway.finalizeInboundTransfer fails indefinitely, there is currently no way to recover the...

Signature malleability not protected against

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details OpenZeppelin has a vulnerability in versions lower than 4.7.3, which can be exploited by an attacker. The project uses a vulnerable version ECDSA signature malleability package.jsonL27-L28 package.jsonL27-L28 : "@openzeppelin/contracts":...

Set admin emit event with wrong data

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact emit AdminUpdatedadmin, newAdmin; will emit AdminUpdated with same values. Proof of Concept Tools Used Code analytics Recommended Mitigation Steps store address of admin before --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All...

Use safeTransferFrom instead of transferFrom()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Although ERC20 standard suggests that a transfer should return true on success, there are tokens that doesn't comply with this. Therefore, the transferFrom call might cause silent failures and will affect the token accounting in this contract. Proof of...

execute does not work for ERC1155 tokens orders where amount > 1

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact StandardPolicyERC1155 functions canMatchMakerBid and canMatchMakerBid always return amount == 1, regardless of the function arguments. This means that calling execute on an agreed order of ERC1155 token with an amount 1 will always transfer amount == 1 o...

revokeApproval() only work with WETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can invoke execute successfully even if revokedApprovalmsg.sender == true Proof of Concept If buyer did invoke revokeApproval it only block matching the orders if paymentToken == WETH but if the paymentToken == address0 the buyer could invoke execut...

ExecutionDelegate can approve arbitrary calling contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owner can steal users' funds and tokens. Proof of Concept The owner of ExecutionDelegate can approve any contract to call it, e.g. a malicious contract which can then drain all funds and tokens approved by users to ExecutionDelegate. Users should only...

Critical matching policy logic is unenforced

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Malicious order matching. Proof of Concept When being executed two orders are matched using custom matching policies. Certain checks are critical for every order matching. Currently these checks would have to be implemented in the matching policies...

Transfer reminder of msg.value is bad practice

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Transfer reminder of msg.value is bad practice. Can lead to out of gas, reentrancy and so on. Proof of Concept Tools Used Static analytics Recommended Mitigation Steps Can create method getReminder and user to call to get all reminders for him. --- The...

Unused slippage params

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unused slippage params. function outboundTransfer in L2GraphTokenGateway both L1 and L2 do not use slippage parameters., making it susceptible to sandwich attacks / MEV. Proof of Concept 'uint256, // unused on L2 uint256, // unused on L2' Tools Used...

Unchecked transfer/transferFrom return can lead to protocol lose of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is good to add a require statement that checks the return value of token transfers or to use something like OpenZeppelin's safeTransfer/safeTransferFrom unless one is sure the given token reverts in case of a failure. Failure to do so will cause silen...

Upgraded Q -> M from 193 [1665109261242]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 193 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

IMPORTANT STATE UPDATES ARE MADE AFTER THE CALLBACK IN THE MINT() FUNCTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details In AlgebraPool.sol, the mint function has a callback to the msg.sender in the middle of the function while there are still updates to state that take place after the callback. The lock modifier guards against reentrancy but not against cross function reentrancy...

Some real-world NFT tokens may support both ERC721 and ERC1155 standards, which may break gobble ()

Lines of code 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 Mitigation Steps --- The...