[MEDIUM] ARCDVestingVault#deposit and NFTBoostVault#_lockTokens- Unsafe transferFrom function is not properly invoked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of transferFrom in the ARCDVestingVaultdeposit and NFTBoostVaultlockTokens functions presents a risk of erroneous token transfers. The transferFrom function doesn't perform necessary validations e.g. validate the returned bool in case of failure,...

User cannot withdraw their ERC1155 tokens.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the NFTBoostVault.sol contract, users can only withdraw their ERC1155 if utilized when they are withdrawing all their tokens at once. this can lead to loss of funds for the users who decide to withdraw their locked tokens in bits. Proof of Concept Whe...

Voting can fail in early stage of voting in case of voter's voting power increase .

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Voting may fail in early stage of voting in case of voter's voting power increase . Proof of Concept In CoreVoting.sol , in terms of voting again the logic in vote function looks like this : // if a user has already voted, undo their previous vote. //...

withdrawFees Have a vulnerability leading to

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Thé withdrawFees function allows the manager to withdraw all ETH fees from the contract., this function uses the transfer method here the vulnerable part: function withdrawFeesaddress recipient external onlyRoleBADGEMANAGERROLE if recipient == address0...

ARCDVestingVault._syncVotingPower could revert if newVotingPower is big enough.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ARCDVestingVault.syncVotingPower calculate the change in voting power using int256newVotingPower - int256grant.latestVotingPower. If newVotingPower is greater than typeint256.max, ARCDVestingVault.syncVotingPower could revert. Proof of Concept...

voting power is insufficiently tracked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Historical balance tracking of votingPower is not stored due to values being updated in memory rather than storage. This means old delegatees may retain voting power which should have been removed from them, new delegatees may not not receive their...

IF FEE ON TRANSFER TOKEN CONFIGURED AS THE VOTING TOKEN FOR THE VAULT, IT COULD INTRODUCE ACCOUNTING ERROR FOR VOTE COUNT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The NFTBoostVault.lockTokens function is used to transfer the ERC20 voting token of the vault and the ERC1155 NFT to the NFTBoostVault contract after accounting for their respective votes. The issue here is that a fee-on-transfer token could get selected...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #899 [1690501938379]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 899 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: issue ! --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Unauthorized Contract Upgrade Vulnerability in Upgradable Contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details In the "upgrade" function, the contract allows the owner to upgrade the contract to a new implementation using the provided address and code hash. However, there is a flaw in the implementation that can allow an attacker to bypass the contract upgrade checks an...

Honest users could lose funds due to the current implementation of executeProposal()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the InterChainGovernance.sol contract, the executeProposal function lacks an explicit check to ensure that the msg.value provided with the function call is greater than or equal to the nativeValue specified. After an extensive discussion with the...

InterchainTokenService.expressReceiveTokenWithData does not apply Check-Effect-Interaction mode

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact InterchainTokenService.expressReceiveTokenWithData does not apply the Check-Effect-Interaction pattern. In some edge cases, the caller can lose funds. Proof of Concept The life cycle of sending token across chains contains 3 phases: //P1: launch on sourc...

TokenManager.sendToken/callContractWithInterchainToken/transmitInterchainTransfer require re-entry protection

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone can deploy a TokenManagerLockUnlock for the existing ERC20 via registerCanonicalToken, and deploy the corresponding token on a target chain via deployRemoteCanonicalToken. After the TokenManagers of the two chains are created, users can transfer...

Attacker can brick redemptions by donating a small amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact While the fix properly fixes the issue of collateralization ratio overflows that can no longer occurs, it enables DoS attacks on the redemption mechanism: Issue description Consider the example that was already provided code-423n4/2023-06-angle-findings9...

M-04 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details While the fix improves the APR estimation for the case that is described in the finding, it significantly worsens it for other scenarios which may happen in practice when we assume underlying staking protocols with relatively constant APRs. For instance, consid...

Pending owner can be the wrong recipient of ownership

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can call the acceptOwnership function with their address as the pending owner before the legitimate pending owner has a chance to call the function Proof of Concept The transferOwnership function allows the current owner to set a pending owne...

_winningRandomNumber vartiable used in calculating if caller is winner can be read via web3.getStorageAt() and user can predict if he wins or not before hand

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the variable winningRandomNumber used in isWinner to calc if caller has won the tier can be read, and the calculation can be predicted. Proof of Concept that a variable is marked internal doesnt mean it cannot be read Tools Used vs code Recommended...

Possible centralization issue in PrizePool.closeDraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details The winning random number is chosen by DrawManager, which will lead to centralization risk. Despite haventt really deep dive in codebase of this issue, but if DrawManager ,can somehow calculate which random number can make their controlled address is winner wit...

The output amount validation in Vault.liquidate() is not correct.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The output amount validation is not correct in Vault.liquidate, so the method might accept invalid output amount and refuse valid output amount. Proof of Concept In Vault.liquidate, there is a validation about the output share amount should be less than ...

A Storage Write Removal Bug in contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary In fallbackLSP17Extendable, Calling functions that conditionally terminate the external EVM call using the assembly statements return... may result in incorrect removals of prior storage writes. Impact In LSP17Extendable.sol, fallbackLSP17Extendable is...

The fork escrow voting should use the snapshot mechanism to save whether the current DAO state reaches the fork threshold

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The fork escrow vote does not use the snapshot mechanism or checkpoint mechanism to save whether the current DAO state reaches the fork threshold, which may cause the timing of the fork to be missed. Proof of Concept Suppose the following scenario: 1. Wh...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #835 [1689085140858]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 835 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Code Execution on the ERC725Account in ILSP6KeyManager.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The ILSP6KeyManager interface has a few potential security vulnerabilities. These vulnerabilities allow an attacker to execute malicious code on the ERC725Account, bypass nonce checking, and bypass timestamp checking. These vulnerabilities could be...

bad actore can increase gas usage in swapfrom function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact bad actor can increase gas in swapfrom function because everytime calling swapfrom function it store new unit and everytime runs the loop for length of it Proof of Concept the swapfrom function includes function setReservesIERC20 memory tokens, uint256...

Funds added to reserves through sync are accidentally transferred out to users

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Wells have the ability to shift funds to other Wells as part of gas-efficient multi-pool swaps. This natspec explanation of this can be find here. The sync function is intended to synchronize the underlying token amounts with the token reserves of the...

Pool address predictability creates many problems

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Aquifer.boreWell function is responsible for creating new Well. This is done using the LibClone.cloneDeterministic function. The address of the new Well depends solely on the salt and/or immutableData parameter provided by the user. Once a user creat...

No fee swap is possible through addLiquidity and removeLiquidityImbalanced

Lines of code Vulnerability details impact Some will not pay swap fees even after the swap fee is added. proof of concept This is equivalent to swap 1000 tokenA to 500 tokenB, but no fee calculation code lies in adding and removing liquidity. Add this test in Well.AddLiquidity.t.sol. function...

Well.skim() TRANSACTION CAN BE FRONT RUN BY Well.sync() TRANSACTION THUS MAKING THE Well.skim() CALL INEFFECTIVE

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Well.skim external function is used to transfer the excess tokens held by the well to teh recipient. This is done by calculating the differnce between the contract balance and the reserves for each of the tokens as shown below: skimAmountsi =...

Well.sol contract allows anyone to add liquidity to tokens with fee-on-transfer by calling the addLiquidity function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious user can call the wrong function for adding liquidity for a pair with fee-on-transfer tokens. The reserves information maintained within the contract suffers from an inconsistency which can result in various miscalculations for liquidity...

_addLiquidity() function will revert in first call

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first user cant calls the addLiquidity function because this function doesn't handle the first call. addLiquidity function is calculate lp amount by calling calcLPTokenUnderlying function. so this function has a division for lpTokenSupply. in this...

uint128 changeAmount might overflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This issue is an edge case, that uint128 changeAmount could overflow, making the protocol fail for certain amount of swap. Proof of Concept Let's break down the changeAmount: 1. amountOut/amountIn 2. BASE27 3. normalizer File:...

Poor detection of disputed trees allows claiming tokens from a disputed tree

Lines of code Vulnerability details Targets Impact Users can claim rewards from a Merkle tree that's being disputed. This can potentially lead to loss of funds since a malicious trusted EOA can claim funds from a malicious tree while it's being disputed. Proof of Concept The...

Functions don't update after being called

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Without updating the reserve or vault value of tokens after calling different functions, the contract may be prone to inconsistent state, security issues, financial implications, and bad user experience. It is important to review and update the reserve...

addLiquidity() unable to work

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact missing the first transfer of the asset to router, addLiquidity unable to work Proof of Concept UlyssesRouter.addLiquidityuse for mint LP The code is as follows: function addLiquidityuint256 amount, uint256 minOutput, uint256 poolId external returns...

Missing deadline checks allow pending transactions to be maliciously executed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In PoolActions.sol, swapToEqualAmounts function has no deadline check for the transaction when swapping. File: src/talos/libraries/PoolActions.sol function swapToEqualAmountsActionParams memory actionParams, int24 baseThreshold internal bool zeroForOne,...

Calls to rigidRedemption can fail due to an underflow when collateralAsset price falls.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the collateralAsset price falls drastically a wrong collateralAmount is calculated in the line below from the eusdAmount. The collateralAmount calculated can be greater than the amount deposited by the provider in the rigidRedemption. Which leads to...

First user can drain funds from staking contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the first user locks an extremely small amount of tokens 1 wei, he can manipulate the reward that is supposed to receive. After locking a small amount, he can unlock it before the second user interacts with the contract. See PoC for more details. Note...

quorumReached does not account for forVotes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact quorumReached does not account for forVotes. Proof of Concept The supportVodes mapping of the ProposalExtraData struct consists of three values: forVotes, againstVotes and abstainVotes respectively on keys 0, 1 and 2. The function: function...

The LybraRETHVault.depositEtherToMint doesn't keep record of user's ether deposits which results in loss for the user.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact High: User will lose his deposited ether. Proof of Concept The collateralAsset address variable which is used in LybraPeUSDVaultBase is assumed to be stETH token address Now the depositEtherToMint function from contract LybraRETHVault.sol which inherits...

Users potentially cannot have Canto token swapped automatically when bridging assets to the Canto Network

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the field AutoSwapThreshold is set to zero value, the logic that compares standardCoinBalance to the autoSwapThreshold always evaluates to false so there isn't any swap operation from bridged asset to Canto token for users. Therefore, the purpose of t...

users being overcharged or not receiving the full amount of coins as they expected caused by the incorrect calculation of the amount of coins bought

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact in the GetInputPrice function there a line inputAmtWithFee := inputAmt.Mulsdk.NewIntFromBigIntdeltaFee.BigInt tat make a problem so here we have in that line in the GetInputPrice function, the sdk.NewIntFromBigInt function it's takes the big.Int as an...

The validation of the source channel is performed incorrectly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a potential risk of unauthorized sources sending assets to the Canto Network and automatically swapping transferred tokens for Canto tokens. Proof of Concept When bootstrapping Canto Network, node operators config channel ID for the onboarding...

Arbitrary parameters

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no way to check that the sequence parameter is indeed a correct one Proof of Concept It is being passed straight to a function which modifies the KVStore's pools, thus it could be any value due to not being checked e. g. it could be 0,...

Lack of deadline parameter when executing swaps

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Deadline is not checked. The transaction may stay unexecuted for a long time, resulting in unfavourable trade when the transaction is finally executed. Proof of Concept The function OnRecvPacket is used to help users outside of Canto onboard seamlessly...

Doesn’t have proper slippage control.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For risk management purposes, a swap will fail if the input coin amount exceeds a predefined limit. But it is not a slippage control. It doesn’t consider how many Canto a user wants to swap for. It is possible that the user will swap the token at a very...

StRSR.withdraw can be blocked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact StRSR.withdraw can be blocked for user by changing basket's asset to IFFY status. User will not be able to withdraw and his funds can be seized later. Proof of Concept StRSR.withdraw function allows user to withdraw only, when basketHandler.isReady. And...

Inadequate error handling

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary This report highlights a high vulnerability related to inadequate error handling in the code under review. Vulnerability Details The code lacks proper error handling in certain functions. Specifically, when errors occur, such as in the swapCoins functio...

M-03 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of M-03: Issue not mitigated, see comments Link to Issue: code-423n4/2023-05-ambire-findings16 Comments The issue is not mitigated. There is an error in the implementation of the mitigation of M-03. See report adriro-MR-M-03-ERROR for details. Assess...

M-03 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details adriro-MR-M-03-ERROR: Recovery transaction can be replayed after a cancellation The mitigation of M-03 contains an error in the implementation of the fix. The original issue is still present. Impact The report in M-03 describes an issue related to the replay of...

M-05 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Mitigation of M-05: Issue NOT mitigated Mitigated issue M-05: Virgin stake can claim all drops Fix: code-423n4/2023-05-xeth@aebc324 The issue is that if dripping is enabled when totalSupply == 0 the entire amount dripped will immediately accrue to the first...

RToken.redeem should claim rewards before sending tokens to user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact RToken.redeem should claim rewards before sending tokens to user. Because after that he will not receive them anymore. Proof of Concept When user mints RToken, then he sends some tokens as collateral and they are stored by BackingManager. Some of...