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...

Project.changeOrder() might reinitialize already completed task.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact changeOrder can be used to change subcontractor. But if a project builder approves the signature by fault or the contractor is delegated, a malicious contractor and subcontractor might reinitialize an already completed task and complete again to receive...

projectCost may be reverted due to out of gas problem if having too many tasks. lendToProject and recoverTokens may always revert because of this.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact projectCost may be reverted due to out of gas problem if having too many tasks. lendToProject and recoverTokens may always revert because of this. If lendToProject always revert, community owner won't be able to lends fund to the published project. Tasks...

It should not submit a project with no total budget. Requires at least one task with cost > 0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When publishing a project, there is still possibility the project doesn't have any task or 0 budget. Proof of Concept According to contest guideline, there is an information says "Note that you cannot submit a project with no total budget. Therefore it...

Lack of check for fee tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The lendToProject function will receive the cost as an argument. However, some tokens will charge a fee, which might cause the balance of the token in the contract mismatch the cost. File: contracts/Project.sol /// @inheritdoc IProject function...

Possible DOS in lendToProject() and toggleLendingNeeded() function because unbounded loop can run out of gas

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Project contract, the lendToProject function might not be available to be called if there are a lot of Task in tasks list of project. It means that the project cannot be funded by either builder or community owner. This can happen because lendToProjec...

H03: do use default zero to check account exist.

Lines of code Vulnerability details MIMOProxyRegistry.sol, deployFor function deployForaddress owner public override returns IMIMOProxy proxy IMIMOProxy currentProxy = currentProxiesowner; // Do not deploy if the proxy already exists and the owner is the same. if addresscurrentProxy != address0 &...

Anyone can receive tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As long as there is token balance or WETH in ReceiverImplementation contract, anybody can receive tokens or weth by making a call to AxelarDepositService.nativeUnwrap with their address as recipient Tools Used Manual review Recommended Mitigation Steps...

Upgraded Q -> M from 93 [1659526885300]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 93 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: Use call instead of transfer Contract ETHRegistrarController.sol Description It was observed that withdraw function is using transfer function instead of call for transferring ether. This could become a problem i...

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...

Not calling approve(0) before setting a new approval causes the call to revert when used with some tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Not calling approve0 before setting a new approval causes the call to revert when used with Tether USDT Impact Some tokens like USDT do not work when changing the allowance from an existing non-zero allowance value it will revert if the current approval is not...

Misleading mapping delegates

Lines of code Vulnerability details The mapping delegates in VoteEscrowDelegation can be misleading it is not updated when a delegation is removed. If someone is relying on this value not the case here, because this mapping is never used in the contracts ?, but we can assume that it has / will ha...

Fees are lost after GOLOM token supply limit has been reached

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the 1 billion supply has been reached for the GOLOM token, addFee in RewardDistributor will automatically return to the start without updating any trades, however will still accept fees being sent from GolomTrader. These fees however cannot be claim...

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...

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...

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 _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...

High risk with links to code

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...

[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...

DNSSECImpl.verifySignature compares strings incorrectly, allowing malicious zones to forge DNSSEC trust chain

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact DNSSEC allows parent zones to sign for its child zones. To check validity of a signature, RFC4034 3.1.7 requires the Signer's Name in any RRSIG RDATA to contain the zone of covered RRset. This requirement is reasonable since any child zone should be...

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...

Incorrect implementation of RRUtils.serialNumberGte

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Comparing serial numbers should follow RFC1982 due to the possibility of numbers wrapping around. RRUtils.serialNumberGte tried to follow the RFC but failed to do so, leading to incorrect results in comparison. Proof of Concept For a serial number i1 to ...

[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...

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...

auction.start might be zero after a new auction is created.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently several functions consider the auction is valid when auction.start 0 and they don't work properly when auction.start = 0. Proof of Concept In this part, auction.start = 0 when block.timestamp = 232 exactly. Of course, this is an edge case and...

If baseJoin's available balance is greater than callers' amount no underlying will be transferred.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If callers' amount is greater than baseJoin's available balance 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...

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...

Auctions can be started for same undercollateralized vault using different Witch contracts, which causes vault collateral loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Given that there are two deployed Witch contracts, two auctioneers are calling Witch 1 and Witch 2's auction functions for the same vault at similar times. Both transactions are included in the same block for which the governances of these Witch contract...

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...

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 233 [1657954928095]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 233 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

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...

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...

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...

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...

Buyout Module: redeeming before the update of totalSupply will make buyout's current state success

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact MED - a hypothetical attack path with stated assumptions, but external requirements. Attacker can create a vault with successful buyout status and non zero supply. The attacker can sell the fractions and then simply withdraw the assets. Proof of Concept...

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...

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

Lines of code Vulnerability details call should be used instead of transfer on address payable Impact The use of the deprecated transfer function for an address wll make the transaction fail when 1. The withdrawer smart contract does not implement a payable function. 2. The withdrawer smart...

Migration's leave and withdrawContribution use payable.transfer calls with an arbitrary receiver

Lines of code Vulnerability details Migration's leave and withdrawContribution transfer out native tokens via payableto.transfer call. This is unsafe as transfer has hard coded gas budget and can fail when msg.sender is a smart contract. Such transactions will fail for smart contract users which...

Anyone can call propose() and create a DOS

Lines of code Vulnerability details A denial of service can be initiated by anyone, since there is no check for any address, and also no Ether/ERC20 at stake. Impact Denial of service for vault migration Proof of Concept Contract : Migration.sol, function propose Recommended Mitigation Steps Make...

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...

Small scalar may make buyoutPrice calculation incorrectly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Buyout.start function, buyoutPrice is calculated using a scalar = 100. This small scalar and division rouding will reduce the precision of the formula significantly. Proof of Concept 1. Alice call start with msg.value = 1e18 and depositAmount = 4567...

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...

percsion error that causes buyoutprice to be very low causing the fractionPrice very low or very high

Lines of code Vulnerability details percsion error that causes buyoutprice to be very low causing the fractionPrice very low detials how does buyout become realy low? because of this percison error in the code if you supply msg.value=1 depsitAmount=1 totalSupply=5 1. also there is a possiblity th...

# 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...

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...

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 ...