User can manipulate approvals and disapprovals of relative quorum strategy

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious user with sufficient permissions can manipulate approvals and disapprovals of actions using the relative quorum strategy. They could effectively ensure that any action has an 100% chance of being approved or disapproved, even when the...

Lack of Access Control

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract does not enforce proper access control mechanisms for critical functions such as deployWithdrawVault, deployNodeELRewardVault, updateStaderConfig, and updateVaultProxyAddress. As a result, any address can call these functions and potentially...

FRONT-RUNNING SUSCEPTIBILITY IN ADDBID()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Auction.addBid is susceptible to front-running attacks. This vulnerability presents a significant risk as participants with adequate knowledge or skill could manipulate Ethereum transaction ordering to gain undue advantage, potentially compromising the...

Adding Block.number to Block.timestamp

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. In the highlighted functions, the lastExcessETHDepositBlock is updated every time the function depositETHOverTargetWeight is called because it is set to the last block.number. If the function is called...

A trusted node has the ability to submit the ExchangeRate multiple times for a single reportingBlockNumber.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In this code, a trusted node can submit data several times. The trusted node can submit ExchangeRateData and then it can submit different data again about same reportingBlockNumber. This will occur mess of staderOracle contract, so it will be needed to b...

sell reward rTokens at low price because of skiping furnace.melt

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The reward rToken sent to RevenueTrader will be sold at a low price. RSR stakers will lose some of their profits. Proof of Concept RevenueTraderP1.manageToken function is used to launch auctions for any erc20 tokens sent to it. For the RevenueTrader of t...

Loss of user funds due to gas Limit set to zero on L2StandardBridge

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User loss of funds in the event a deposit fails. Proof of Concept In L2StandardBridge.finalizeDeposit, there exists an issue related to the gas limit setting. In the event of a failed transfer, it attempts to create a return transaction to refund the use...

Function _execBuyNftFromMarket() Fails to Check the Actual ETH Balance in the Contract After Executing the Trade

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function execBuyNftFromMarket, if the user chooses to use WETH, the function deposits ETH and approves the amount of WETH to the marketplace. After executing the trade at the marketplace, the function checks that the balance decrease is correct in...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #5 [1685528763875]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 5 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-03 Host that owns Party NFTs can circumvent reentrancy guard --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Current design won't allow to update reference implementation without breaking counterfactuality

Lines of code Vulnerability details Current design won't allow to update reference implementation without breaking counterfactuality The current design of the Ambire wallet doesn't allow to update the reference implementation as doing so will break counterfactuality. Impact Ambire wallets are...

Fallback handlers can trick users into calling functions of the AmbireAccount contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Fallback handlers can trick users into calling functions of the AmbireAccount contract Selector clashing can be used to trick users into calling base functions of the wallet. Impact Fallback handlers provide extensibility to the Ambire wallet. The main idea her...

execute() replay RECOVER after cancel

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Maliciously replay a recover transaction that has been cancelled and execute it Proof of Concept The user can cancel the transactions already in scheduledRecoveries by using SIGMODECANCEL. The code is as follows: function executeTransaction calldata txns...

didPay() front-running

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The minting flow of tokens in JBXBuybackDelegate is divided into separate external functions: payParams and didPay. The didPay function can only be called by jbxTerminal, while payParams can be called by anyone without restrictions. The payParams functio...

Invalid conversion uint256 -> int256

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Invalid conversion uint256 - int256 in pool.swap.... The number may be incorrectly converted uint256 data.amount.value - int256 amountSpecified. As a result, number truncation may occur. Proof of Concept typeuint256.max =...

Minting exposes beneficiaries to unlimited slippage while minting the token out, sending back the token in the terminal.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The amount of tokens minted/assets received when minting can be manipulated to an unlimited extent by manipulating the reserves of the pool. Proof of Concept Here the mint function mints the tokens out to the beneficiary. However the Delegate can't speci...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #597 [1684599598059]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 597 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L4 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Incorrect decimal handling in _startAuction, resulting in wrong auction.startBidBps

Lines of code Vulnerability details Shortfall.startAuction uses the oracle price of the underlying tokens to price the pool bad debt: Shortfall.sol 389: for uint256 i; i the price returned by priceOracle.getUnderlyingPrice has a number of decimals equal to 36 - vToken decimals. This means the...

Malicious actor can win auction unfavorably to the protocol by block stuffing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details When protocol’s bad debt is auctioned off with 10% incentive at the beginning. A user who gives the best bid, wins. The auction ends when at least one account placed a bid, and current block number is bigger than nextBidderBlockLimit:...

A user asset cannot be seized if the supplied market's collateral to seize(vTokenCollateral)is different than the pool(seizerContract) where the liquidateBorrow function is called.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A user asset cannot be seized if the supplied market's collateral to seizevTokenCollateralis different than the poolseizerContract where the liquidateBorrow function is called. Proof of Concept A user asset cannot be seized if the supplied market's...

mint() function: Rogue lenders/attackers could mint multiple/endless position NFTs for their SAME Ajna pool deposits/LPs, when they're supposed to be able to mint only one position NFT per lender per LP per pool.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The current implementation of the mint function allows a lender to mint multiple position NFTs for the same Ajna pool deposit. This could lead to an inflation of NFTs and potentially disrupt the system's reward distribution, as the lender could stake the...

Integer Overflow/Underflow in function fundTreasury.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact fundTreasury function in the GrantFund.sol contract is vulnerable to integer overflow if the value of treasury variable is close to the maximum value of a uint256 integer, which is 2^256-1, and a large value of fundingAmount is added to it. It is possibl...

Use of msg.sender in mayInteract Modifier

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The use of msg.sender in the mayInteract modifier in the contract. I have identified a potential vulnerability in the use of msg.sender. In this case, the vulnerability is caused by using msg.sender to authorize interactions with the contract. Since...

unstake() function: The unstake function permits the unstaking of multiple position NFTs from the same liquidity pool (LP) by the same lender. This opens the possibility for a lender to claim more Ajna token rewards than they are entitled to by staking and unstaking multiple NFTs associated with the same LP.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The absence of a mechanism to prevent a lender from unstaking multiple NFTs for the same liquidity pool LP could potentially lead to the exploitation of the Ajna token reward system. A lender can mint, stake, and unstake multiple NFTs for the same LP fro...

Mitigation Confirmed for NEW

Note: Issue has not actually been resolved but for some reason I can't get my issues to submit without "Mitigation confirmed no new vulnerabilities detected" checked so I am doing this as a work around Severity High Lines of code Impact Derivative will become broken and all funds lost even if the...

Mitigation of M-11: Issue not mitigated, mitigation error

MITIGATION IS NOT CONFIRMED MITIGATION IS NOT CONFIRMED Mitigation of M-11: Issue not mitigated, mitigation error Link to Issue: code-423n4/2023-03-asymmetry-findings152 Comments Even though the sponsor followed the warden's recommendation in issue M-11, I don't think the proposed change properly...

The value of MAX_WITHDRAWAL_DELAY_BLOCKS is constant which shouldn't be

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The value of MAXWITHDRAWALDELAYBLOCKS is constant which shouldn't be. It is stated that at the moment MAXWITHDRAWALDELAYBLOCKS is 50400 and it is adjustable, but it isn't in this case as it is constant and once deployed it can't be change Proof of Concep...

StrategyBase.sharesToUnderlying() cannot be overridden to intended mutability

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An implementation of sharesToUnderlying, as inherited from StrategyBase.sol, cannot contrary to intentions make state modifications. This implies that StrategyBase.sol may become useless as a base contract to inherit from. Proof of Concept StrategyBase.s...

MAX_WITHDRAWAL_DELAY_BLOCKS assumes that block time is always 12 seconds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Block time may change in the future which may affect the protocol's withdrawal functionality. Proof of Concept StrategyManagerStorage.sol assumes a 12-second blocks timing. If the block time changes in the future the MAXWITHDRAWALDELAYBLOCKS of one week...

[H-02] Owner cannot freeze and thus cannot slash a queued withdraw that has the delegatedAddress being the 0 address.

Lines of code Vulnerability details canSlash checks to see if the block number is less than whitelistedContractDetailstoBeSlashedslashingContract, which will be 0 if a user has not delegated an address. This will revert freezeOperatorand not allow an owner/watcher to freeze the address, and thus...

Measuring the withdrawal delay in block production time won't work properly on chains where the production time is not 12 seconds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept For withdrawals other than beaconChainETH, the variables withdrawalDelayBlocks and MAXWITHDRAWALDELAYBLOCKS will be used to enforce a delay for withdrawals in StrategyManager.sol. Currently MAXWITHDRAWALDELAYBLOCKS is set to 50400. uint256 publ...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #407 [1683102761347]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 407 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L01 Unsafe downcasting On PrivatePool.solL230-L231 there are two unsafe downcasting from uint256 to uint128; virtualBaseTokenReserves += uint128netInputAmount - feeAmount - protocolFeeAmount; virtualNftReserves -=...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #680 [1683016846473]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 680 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: D. FlashFee is a flat amount, meaning the cost to flash loan an NFT at floor price is the same as one worth 5x the floor price. FlashFee should instead be based on the weigh of the NFT being flashloaned, with more...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #240 [1683052133668]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 240 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: LOW‑11 tokenURI does not follow EIP-721 The EIP states that tokenURI "Throws if tokenId is not a valid NFT", which the code below does not do. If the NFT has not yet been minted, tokenURI should revert Proof Of Conce...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #623 [1682589089611]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 623 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L‑05 Stuck dust in SafEth contract for division When stake in the contract SafEth some WEIs could be stuck in the contract because the equation uint256 ethAmount = msg.value weight / totalWeight;, in example: ethAmou...

OperatorProposal._executeOperation() should refund excess ETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are excess ETH in OperatorProposal.executeOperation, and it should be refunded. Proof of Concept OperatorProposal.executeOperation runs data.operator.execute with data.operatorValue of ETH. data.operator.execute value: data.operatorValue...

MaxContribution check can be bypassed to give a card high voting power

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept ReraiseETHCrowdfund tries limit the voting power of each card by doing a min/maxContribution check in claim and claimMultiple. uint96 contribution = votingPower 1e4 / exchangeRateBps; uint96 maxContribution = maxContribution; // Check that the...

refund() for ETHCrowdfund may fail for the final user due to rounding discrepancies

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept This is how fee is deducted from a user's contribution when the user contributes. Observe that amount at the end is slightly greater than it's suppose to be due to the rounding in the feeAmount calculation. if fundingSplitRecipient != address0 ...

Contributions can be smaller than minContribution and may receive no voting power

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Valid contribution is awarded no voting power Proof of Concept ETHCrowdfundBase.solL195-L219 uint96 minContribution = minContribution; if amount maxContribution revert AboveMaximumContributionsErroramount, maxContribution; uint96 newTotalContributions =...

CHANGEFEE IS NOT CORRECTLY SCALED IN FLASHLOAN()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact changeFee that has been scaled with 4 decimals of of basis points is being adopted by flashloan. This could make the function behave in an unexpected manner than intended. Proof of Concept The fee is calculated as: PrivatePool.solL632 uint256 fee =...

It's not always possible for a user to claim their voting power in ReraiseETHCrowdfund

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept When a ReraiseETHCrowdfund has finalized, a user has 2 ways to claim their voting power - claim or claimMultiple. The condition in claim is that user's total contribution is no greater than the maxContribution. uint96 contribution = votingPower...

A hacker can front-run the owner of a PrivatePool to drain the pool

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A hacker can sandwitch calls to setVirtualReserves or setMerkleRoot in a private pool and make an instant profit at the expense of the owner. For example, the hacker sees that there is a setVirtualReserves transaction in the mempool that will make the NF...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #13 [1680615156614]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 13 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The MuteBond.deposit function allows the user to purchase a bond with LP tokens and receive MUTE tokens in return. The bondPrice increases linearly over time which I should...

Attacker can steal the locked NFT in protocol because of lacking check in function borrowToBuy()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In function borrowToBuy, the borrower takes a loan offer and uses the funds to purchase NFT. / Take the loan offer. / takeLoanOfferoffer, signature, lienId, loanAmount, collateralTokenId; / Lock token. / offer.collection.transferFrommsg.sender,...

Function takeBid() allows attacker to sell any collateral NFT that deposited through function borrowToBuy()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function borrowToBuy is used by the borrower to take a loan offer and uses the funds to purchase NFT. However, even though it sends ETH along when calling function execute to buy the requested NFT, it approves the collateral NFT to Blur for no reason. /...

MuteAmplifier.rescueTokens() checks the wrong condition for muteToken

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There will be 2 impacts. The reward system would be broken as the rewards can be withdrawn before starting staking. Some rewards would be locked inside the contract forever as it doesn't check totalReclaimed Proof of Concept rescueTokens checks the below...

MuteAmplifier.sol: multiplier calculation is incorrect which leads to loss of rewards for almost all stakers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This report deals with how the calculation of the multiplier in the MuteAmplifier contract is not only different from how it is displayed in the documentation on the website but it is also different in a very important way. The calculation on the website...

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...

withdraw function of WstEth derivative contract probably sends wrong ETH amount back to owner contract/user

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Sends the wrong amount of ETH back to owner contract/user. In most cases, probably way too much, it sends the entire contract ETH balance. All the other calculations in the withdraw function seem correct, from what can be seen, but, as is the case with...

MuteBond.sol: price discount can be manipulated which undermines its purpose of reflecting demand

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The bondPrice in the MuteBond contract increases linearly during the epochDuration from startPrice in the beginning to maxPrice in the end. The bondPrice determines how many MUTE tokens a user receives for bonding his LP tokens. The higher the bondPrice...

All the FRX_ETH tokens of SfrxEth contract can be drained by a malicious user.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The impact of this finding is severe, as it can result in the complete loss of FRXETH tokens held by the SfrxEth contract. This could lead to a significant financial loss for the contract and its users. Proof of Concept For demonstration purpose, Alice i...