Delegate call can manipulate minGasReserve and the _permissions mapping.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the proxy delegatecalls the target contract the target contracts code runs in the proxy’s storage. This means the target code has access to all of proxy’s storage including internal mappings. As a result, the target contracts code can manipulate...

Malicious manipulation of gas reserve can deny access to MIMOProxy

Lines of code Vulnerability details The MIMOProxy contract defines a minGasReserve value as a storage variable: MIMOProxy.solL18: /// @inheritdoc IMIMOProxy uint256 public override minGasReserve; The execute function uses this minGasReserve value to calculate a gas stipend to provide to the targe...

The MIMOVaultActions contract cannot withdraw assets to the user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The MIMOVaultActions contract provides users with the functions of depositing, withdrawing and borrowing assets, which is called by the delegatecall of the MIMOProxy contract. But when borrowing or withdrawing assets, there is no function provided to giv...

rbData.toCollateral address can be different than the token address set in swapData.dexTxData.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rbData.toCollateral address can be different than the token address set in swapData.dexTxData. A manager can supply toCollateral address of the collateral within the contract but supply a different address in swapParams.dexTxData such that the contract...

Lack of storage gap for upgradable contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Safe usage of upgradable contract should include a storage gap to allow the addition of new state. OpenZeppelin docs Proof of Concept The following contracts on the project are using upgradable contracts from OpenZeppelin. File: contracts/Community.sol...

Builder can reduce his debt more than expected by replaying signature

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A builder can, after it convened with the lender and an external agent to reduce his debt through escrow, reuse the signature and pass it again to escrow many times. This allows him to reduce his debt more than expected, leaving the lender at a loss. Pro...

It should never be possible to change the status of a completed task

Lines of code Vulnerability details High Risk Finding Impact In Project.sol, once a task is set as completed by calling function setComplete, the contract pays the subcontractor. Once in this state, in should not be possible to change the task state back to ACTIVE/INACTIVE, because then the same...

Automation / management can be set for not yet existing vault

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact & Proof Of Concept vaultOwner returns zero for a non-existing vaultId. Similarly, proxyRegistry.getCurrentProxymsg.sender returns zero when msg.sender has not deployed a proxy yet. Those two facts can be combined to set automation for a vault ID that doe...

Possible signature replay in updateTaskHash() and updateProjectHash() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In updateProjectHash function, the data encoded only hash and nonce value but not the projectAddress. In case builder had 2 or more projects, the signature that builder used in updateProjectHash can also be used in other projects by attackers. bytes memo...

AxelarAuthWeighted - Can set operators to same values to override OLD_KEY_RETENTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is possible to transfer operatorship to the same operators by simply doubling the values of the newWeights array and newThreshold value. This could be used by newly appointed operators to invalidate all previous operators and thus invalidate the...

Will Not Work If Signatures Are Not Sorted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Commands cannot be executed if the signatures submitted are not stored. Proof-of-Concept Consider the following is submitted to the AxelarAuthWeighted.validateSignatures function. Operators = Alice, Bob, Charles Signatures = Charles's Signature, Bob's Signature...

DOS on valid signatures

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It was observed that signature matching can fail due to incorrect updation of operatorIndex. Each loop iteration should reset operatorIndex but this is not happening causing matches to be skipped as shown in POC Proof of Concept 1. Assume...

Able to delegate multiple times with the same tokenId

Lines of code Vulnerability details The delegate function in VoteEscrowDelegation.sol is used to delegate voting power from one tokenId to another. The tokenId is added to the toTokenId's delegatedTokenIds array which contains all tokenIds that have delegated to the toTokenId. The amount of votes...

The function removeDelegation doesn't work

Lines of code Vulnerability details When a delegation is created with the function delegate, the ID of its NFT tokenId is added in the array checkpointstoTokenIdnCheckpoints - 1; where toTokenId is the ID of NFT the user delegates its NFT to. When an user removes the delegation of his NFT with th...

Wrong arithmetic operation upon filling a bid order, lead to lost amount of ether on user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Functions GolomTrader.solfillBid... and GolomTrader.solfillCriteriaBid... used to fill a signed order Golom order.orderType = 1 or = 2 by the buyer after he approved GolomTrader contract some wETH. However, in case that the signed order is of type ERC1155 where...

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...

Impossible to transfer VE tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In VoteEscrowDelegation.sol, function transferFrom will attempt to remove the delegations to the token transferred. // remove the delegation this.removeDelegationtokenId; However this external call will change msg.sender to addressthis, reverting the cal...

[PNM-001] PARENT_CANNOT_CONTROL can be bypassed by maliciously unwrapping parent node

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description By design, for any subdomain, as long as its PARENTCANNOTCONTROL fuse is burnt and does not expire, its parent should not be able to burn its fuses or change its owner. However, this contraint can be bypassed by a parent node maliciously unwrapping...

[PNM-003] The preimage DB (i.e., NameWrapper.names) can be maliciously manipulated/corrupted

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description By design, the NameWrapper.names is used as a preimage DB so that the client can query the domain name by providing the token ID. The name should be correctly stored. To do so, the NameWrapper record the domain's name every time it gets wrapped. And...

[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...

call() should be used instead of transfer() on an address payable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address will inevitably make the transaction fail when the caller is a smart contract and: 1. Does not implement a payable function. 2. Implements a payable fallback which uses more than 2300 gas unit. 3...

It is possible to create fake ERC1155 NameWrapper token for subdomain, which is not owned by NameWrapper

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to re-entrancy possibility in NameWrapper.transferAndBurnFuses called from setSubnodeOwner and setSubnodeRecord, it is possible to do some stuff in onERC1155Received right after transfer but before new owner and new fuses are set. This makes it...

Incorrect amount of Collateral moves for Auction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It was observed that the debt and collateral which moves for Auction is calculated incorrectly. In case where line.proportion is set to small value, chances are art will become lower than min debt. This causes whole collateral to go for auction, which wa...

Reduce the incentive of self liquidation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Reduce the incentive of self liquidation Impact In some situations the borrower may have incentive to self liquidate. For example: May pay less interest Redeem early and reduce the loss or the fee React to abrupt market volitility Other cases to circumvent some...

Vault blacklisting is required

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Add a way to blacklist vault from going in Auction. There may be cases where owner does not want a particular Vault to be Auctioned even if it is undercollateralized as shown in POC. Due to lack of any blacklisting all Vault are treated equally and can g...

Caller can receive liquidatorCut without transferring underlying when calling payBase()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If baseJoin's available balance is greater than callers' amount no underlying will be transferred but caller still gets liquidatorCut. This may also negatively impact the accounting since its updated under the assumption that the caller will transfer...

Incorrect payout calculation due to a division before multiplication

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reverse dutch auction price is calculated incorrectly Proof of Concept In the function calcPayout which calculates reverse dutch auction according to the formula inkOut = artIn / totalArt totalInk p + 1 - p t t is always zero because you divide before...

Caller Can Receive Both liquidatorCut and auctioneerCut

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Caller can call auction from one address then call payBase or payFYToken from another address receiving both liquidatorCut and auctioneerCut. Proof of Concept A caller calls auction passing in an address the caller controls, Address A, into the to...

Upgraded Q -> M from 153 [1657934352278]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 153 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> M from 306 [1657954489063]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 306 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

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...

Accidentally cancel order

Lines of code Vulnerability details Accidentally cancel order Impact Some market maker's limit order might be accidentally cancelled, and has to be resubmitted again. If the user did not do this on purpose, without knowing the fact that the order has been cancelled, it may lead to unexpected...

IF A SINGLE ORDER FAILS, THE WHOLE FUNCTION REVERTS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a single order of the orders array fails, the whole function initiate or exit reverts with no information about which was the vulnerable order, the only information given is an Exception with a code of 5 Proof of Concept Tools Used editor Recommended...

Fee-on-transfer tokens not supported

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorrect accounting will lead to wrong assets distribution and some users gaining more and some users getting fewer tokens than they should. Proof of Concept Functions rely on user input to calculate distribution of tokens instead of relying on the...

Collateral limit can be exceeded on a new auction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Witch's auction checks the total collateral limit before updating the structure with the current auction's data. This way this limit end up not being respected in result of auction call and can be actually breached for an arbitrary big amount as auction.ink tha...

# an attacker can block stuff from the users from being able to do a buyout or sell fractoins or just main functions ,causing grief of users money and time

Lines of code Vulnerability details details uint256 endTime = startTime + PROPOSALPERIOD; if block.timestamp endTime 1.end time is almost block.timestamp so when an user calls this function 2. an attacker can blockstuff and cause the main functions not to happen maybe causing the...

fractionPrice precision can be lost if fractional tokens supply is high enough

Lines of code Vulnerability details Buyout's start now determine fractional token price by dividing native tokens amount by total supply number. Whenever the supply is high enough the precision can be lost, leading to severe losses to buyout proposer as his staked fractional tokens can be valued ...

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...

Migration Module: Usage of withdrawContribution instead of leave before buyout

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact HIGH - Assets can be compromised directly. One can use eth from the module for buyout process. Basically sending somebody else's eth from migration module to buyout module Proof of Concept proof of concept The proof of concepts shows a scenario where one...

dont use transfer ,instead use call

Lines of code Vulnerability details details To withdraw eth it uses transfer, this trnansaction will fail inevitably when : - The withdrwer smart contract does not implement a payable function. Withdrawer smart contract does implement a payable fallback which uses more than 2300 gas unit Thw...

It is possible to burn someone's vault tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is possible to burn someone's vault tokens. Exploit Scenario Let's say Alice and Bob have some vault tokens. For some reason, Bob didn't grab an ice-cream for Alice, therefore Alice wanted to revenge for that. So she decided to burn Bob's vault tokens...

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 ...

Proposal commitment takes all fractional balance in Migration contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Migration contract holds all fractional token balance of all proposals. Let's suppose a single vault has multiple proposals going on, and one gets committed. If the target price is satisfied, then a buyout starts // Checks if the current price is...

Upgraded Q -> H from 187 [1657760940788]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 187 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: 1. rescueETH cannot rescue Ether rescueETH sends msg.value to the destination address, which means it requires the caller of rescueETH to provide the Ether to send. Essentially the owner is directly paying the...

Migration total supply reduction can be used to remove minority shareholders

Lines of code Vulnerability details As new total supply can be arbitrary, setting it significantly lower than current say to 100 when it was 1e9 before can be used to remove current minority shareholders, whose shares will end up being zero on a precision loss due to low new total supply value...

Uninitialized implementation for Vault can be destroyed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Every Vault is a proxy of the same implementation contract. This implementation is deployed from VaultFactory but never initialized. /// @notice Initializes implementation contract constructor implementation = addressnew Vault; Someone can call init in t...

Migration Module: Re-enter commit using custom token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact HIGH - Assets can be compromised directly. One can drain eth out from migration module to buyout module using custom made FERC1155 token. Proof of Concept proof of concept: testCommitReenterpoc custom made FERC1155 for the attack The proof of concept sho...

In JBERC20PaymentTerminal.sol#_transferFrom(...) ignoring return value when IERC20(token).transferFrom(...)

Lines of code Vulnerability details In JBERC20PaymentTerminal.soltransferFrom... ignoring return value when IERC20token.transferFrom... Some of ERC20 token implementations return false upon unsuccess transfer like USDT token, this can lead to some unpredictable balances to rise up without actual...

State Variable Shadowing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Check: shadowing-state Severity: High Confidence: High It is possible to use the same variable twice in Solidity, but it can lead to unintended side effects.The TestAllowance.sol contract inherits from TesTBaseWorkflow.sol. In the TestAllowance.sol...

Reentrancy issues on function distributePayoutsOf

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the contract JBPayoutRedemptionPaymentTerminal, the function distributePayoutsOf calls the internal function distributePayoutsOf and this internal function perfoms a loop where is using the function distributeToPayoutSplitsOfhttps://githu...