Incorrect shift in assembly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Shift operators shlx, y, shrx, y, sarx, y in Solidity assembly apply the shift operation of x bits on y and not the other way around, which may be confusing. Check if the values in a shift operation are reversed. Proof of Concept File: Drips.sol 823: val...

_updateReceiverStates CAN WORK INCORRECTLY WHEN CURRENT RECEIVER AND NEW RECEIVER MATCHES WITH UPDATED DRIP TIMES

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact States can be incorrectly updated. Proof of Concept In updateReceiverStates method of Drips.sol, I noticed a different pattern of Using addDeltaRange when current receiver and new receiver matches with updated drip times. To Remove an existing drip, the...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #783 [1675429188655]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 783 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: restakeGGP doesn't have whenNotPaused modifier At line 319 stakeGGP has whenNotPaused modifier, while restakeGGP has not. Suggest to add the same modifier to restakeGGP. --- The text was updated successfully, but the...

SubprotocolRegistry accepts empty string as protocol name

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The input sanitization statements in SubprotocolRegistry.sol's register function are: function register bool ordered, bool primary, bool active, address nftAddress, string calldata name, uint96 fee external // ... if !ordered || primary || active revert...

Unsafe casting of an int128 to uint128 can cause wrong accounting in _receiveDripsResult

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unsafe casting of int128 to uint128 is dangerous and makes user receive more assets than they should. Proof of Concept state.amtDeltascycle can be a negative value. The delta value at each point is simply the relative change from the previous cycle. If...

_transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details transferFromCaller is not compatible with USDT and similar tokens Summary Setting directly typeuint256.max won't work for USDTTether. This is done at both transferFromCaller: NFTDriver.solL289 AddressDriver.solL174 Description Some tokens like USDT do not work...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #338 [1675444014859]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 338 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-07 It should be possible to assign Minipool to a new Multisig MinipoolManager.sol 1 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Lendgine#mint gifts the borrower liquidity and both underlying token as well which bricks contract functionality

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Borrower of liquidity can just keep borrowing liquidity as he will also get token0 and token1, draining the protocol funds. Proof of Concept Lendginemint calls Pairburn before calling mint to mint the number of ERC20 power tokens. totalLiquidityBorrowed ...

Unprotected payable functions in Payment.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In Payment.sol contract unwrapWETH and sweepToken functions are without any access control. They are public and and doesn't validate that it's being called by any permissioned account. The result is that anyone can steal tokens. Proof of Concept 25:...

Any user is able to mint a new receipt/ticket tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the RabbitHoleReceipt and RabbitHoleTickets contracts the minterAddress should be the only account allowed to mint a new token, but due to an error in the onlyMinter modifier all the users are able to mint new tokens without permission, the impact of...

mintReceipt should not allow users to mint after the end of a quest

Lines of code Vulnerability details mintReceipt currently does not have any check that the questId passed as an argument corresponds to an active quest. As the signature will be valid without a deadline, a user can call mintReceipt after the end of a quest, when there is no more funds in the Ques...

Gas Optimizations

See the markdown file with the details of this report here. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

reentrancy in TimeswapV2Option.collect()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact collect function doesn't respect the check-effect-interaction pattern, where in the case if a param.data is provided it makes an external call to the caller, right after that, it updates option short amount state. in the case if the caller calls back int...

Unsecured usage of msg.sender in smart contract functions TimeswapV2Pool.sol.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The bug is related to the use of the msg.sender in the smart contract functions. The msg.sender is a built-in variable in the Solidity programming language, which represents the address of the account that called the function, the msg.sender is used to...

Upgraded Q -> M from #72 [1674644492627]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 72 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Low-03 NTokenMoonBirds may not be able to receive airdrops Impact For most NToken, some airdrops that are actively minted to the holder's address can be withdrawn and later distributed by the PoolAdmin calling the...

SWC-109 Uninitialized Storage Pointer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Uninitialized local storage variables can point to unexpected storage locations in the contract, which can lead to intentional or unintentional vulnerabilities. Proof of Concept OrderStatus storage orderStatus; Tools Used github Recommended Mitigation...

settleAuction() Check for status errors

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ClearingHouse.safeTransferFrom to execute successfully even if there is no bid Proof of Concept settleAuction is called at the end of the auction and will check if the status is legal function settleAuctionuint256 collateralId public if...

[M-02] Strategist has full control over Public Vault it can be risky for depositors

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The strategist has full control over all key functions. If the strategist is compromised or hacked he will be able to manipulate the vault. For example, increase the depositCap modifyDepositCapuint256 newCap, add a depositor to the whitelist...

Manipulate the price per share value and unfair share of future users' deposits'

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Most of the share based vault implementation will face this issue. The vault is based on the ERC4626 where the shares are calculated based on the deposit value. By depositing large amount as initial deposit, initial depositor can influence the future...

Potential DOS in utilizationRate() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Potential DOS IN UTILIZATIONRATE utilizationrate = borrows / cash + borrows - reserves. if cash+ borrows = reserves this goes to infinity so that utilizationrate reverts. Also if cash + borrows Tools Used Vs code Recommended Mitigation Steps Define...

SmartAccount wallet creation can be backdoored

Lines of code Vulnerability details At wallet creation time, an attacker can temporarily swap the address of the entrypoint to install a backdoor in the form of a registered module in the wallet. Since wallets don't necessarily need to be created by their owners, an attacker can frontrun the wall...

TokenggAVAX.sol : First depositor can break minting of shares

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A well known attack vector for almost all shares based liquidity pool contracts, where an early user can manipulate the price per share and profit from late users' deposits because of the precision loss caused by the rather large value of price per share...

Liquidation logic is incorrect in some conditions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Because purchaseLiquidationAuctionNFT function clears remaining debt of debtor if he has no more collateral, it's possible that when 2 auctions exists in same time, liquidation logic will not work properly and debt will be nullified before last auction i...

Contract owner can drain all NFT collateral

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact To add NFTs as collateral to the protocol and it to create debt, the owner has to approve each NFT contract address first. As anyone can create their own papr vaults with arbitrary allowed NFTs by design, this opens the possibility for malicious actors t...

(*POTENTIAL DUPLICATE) unwrap function can be exploited to exchange lower priced NFT's for higher priced counterparts

Lines of code Vulnerability details POTENTIAL DUPLICATE - Submitted earlier but haven't received an email confirmation. Hence resubmitting - please ignore if my earlier submission was already recorded Impact nftRemove function takes an array of tokenIds and LPTokens, releases the fractional NFT...

LP pricing formula is vulnerable to flash loan manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The LP pricing formula used in the buyQuote, sellQuote, addQuote, removeQuote functions of Pair.sol contract is vulnerable to flash loan manipulation. Proof of Concept The baseTokenReserves calculates the current balance of base token reserves. This...

GroupBuy: Lost ETH when the NFT is bought for less than the minimum reserve price

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The purchase function does not require that an NFT is bought for exactly minReservePricespoolId filledQuantitiespoolId, the price is only not allowed to be greater: if price minReservePricespoolId filledQuantitiespoolId revert InvalidPurchase; This makes...

recoverTimelock can have a value shorter than the winner's deadline to claim

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The value of recoverTimelock is checked to be greater than a week and less than a year, but it should never be allowed to be shorter than block.timestamp + settings.drawBufferTime, which is the time given to the winner to claim the NFT. Otherwise it coul...

Functions of Trading contract can be reentered by Position.sol#mint

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Both the contracts of Position and Trading may not work correctly. Proof of Concept The Position.solmint calls safeMint will trigger a checkOnERC721Received callback, which can be used to reenter. Crackers can use this vulnerability to attack the protoco...

Wrong update of stoploss in TradingExtension._limitClose()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact TradingExtension.limitClose returns a wrong stoploss which is favorable for users and it would be a significant loss for the protocol. Proof of Concept TradingExtension.limitClose is used to set takeprofit/stoploss prices for the pending order and execut...

Distribute is open to rewards manipulation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The distribute function is prone to manipulation by the first depositor if the totalShares is low, since the result of transferFrom in distribute is not checked. This can happen if a malicious user calls createLock whereby shares = 1 then calls distribut...

There is no option to cancel an EMERGENCY mode.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no option to cancel an EMERGENCY mode in the pool. Once the pool is in an EMERGENCY mode, the pool can't work as normal forever. Proof of Concept The pool can be changed to an EMERGENCY mode by adminAction. function adminActionuint256 action,...

Protocol is not able to account for baseTokens generating yield

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol's logic is based on the assumption that, while deposited, the underlying baseTokens will generate yield, which accrues to the Traders holding Collateral Tokens. However, there is no mechanism in Collateral.sol to allow it to account for this...

PrePOMarket.redeem() business logic may raise users' concerns of their assets

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When a user tries to redeem assets, current business logic may fail and pop the error msg fee = 0 repeatedly. Users may not understand what's happening behind, thus raise concers about the safety of their assets since it looks like their assets are out o...

Pool._amountToBin() returns a wrong value when protocolFeeRatio = 100%.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Pool.amountToBin returns a larger value than it should when protocolFeeRatio = 100%. As a result, bin balances might be calculated wrongly. Proof of Concept delta.deltaInBinInternal is used to update the bin balances like this. if tokenAIn binBalanceA +=...

In WithdrawHook.hook(), withdraw limits can be bypassed.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In WithdrawHook.hook, withdraw limits can be bypassed. As a result, users might withdraw more amount of the base token at a time than they should. Proof of Concept WithdrawHook.hook checks the withdraw limits like below. if lastGlobalPeriodReset +...

Mint might result in too few tokens minted

Lines of code Vulnerability details mint of PrePOMarket.sol allows the team to mint new short and long tokens in exchange for collateral tokens. Long and short tokens are default ERC20 tokens with 18 decimals, while the collateral ERC20 token uses the decimals of the underlying base token. Howeve...

Lack of access control for sweepToken, refundETH, unwrapWETH9 in Router.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of access control for sweepToken, refundETH, unwrapWETH9 in Router.sol, any WETH token, ETH and ERC20 sent to Router.sol is lost and claimable to anyone. Proof of Concept the function unwrapWETH9 and sweepToken and refundETH has no access control an...

Users will get a low amount of NFT if they try to buy a lot of them

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If user calls buyamount with a value larger than uint48 it will overflow during casting identical to amount = amount % typeuint48.max and cause unexpected behavior for the user. When a user pays a lot of money for a large amount of NFT, but instead they...

saleReceiver and feeReceiver can steal refunds after sale has ended

Lines of code Vulnerability details First, lets go over how a buy happens. A buyer can buy NFTs at a higher price and then once the auction ends they can use refund to return the over payments. The effect is that they bought the NFTs at the lowest price Lowest Price Dutch Auction. Now, let's move...

Some arbitrary feeders will not be removable, even by admin.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description NFTFloorOracle receives data from different "feeders". They are added using addFeeders and removed by removeFeeder. Feeders are managed by two data structures. feeders is an array, each element in the address of the feeder. feederPositionMap maps...

overflow in buy function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact the function doesn't check if the input is more the supply Proof of Concept the function doesn't have any condition check of amount Tools Used manually Recommended Mitigation Steps check the input for maximum or requirement for max supply --- The text wa...

Loss of ETH for NFT buyers in LPDA contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The buy function of LPDA sale contract can be invoked with 0 as the input value and 0 ETH as the sent valuemsg.value = 0. The buy function automatically ends the sale when newId == sale.finalId and distributes ETH to feeReceiver and saleReceiver. Since t...

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...

Upgraded Q -> M from #402 [1670185822442]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 402 as M risk. The relevant finding follows: Staked Gmx RewardTracker may retain allowances Summary: Both the configureGmxState function and the setContractContracts c, address contractAddress can be used to update the PirexGmx contract's stakedGmx storage...

user fund lose in deposit() of PirexERC4626 contract because A MALICIOUS EARLY USER/ATTACKER CAN MANIPULATE THE VAULT’S PRICEPERSHARE TO TAKE AN UNFAIR SHARE OF FUTURE USERS’ DEPOSITS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This is a well-known attack vector for new contracts that utilize pricePerShare for accounting. Attacker can cause totalAssets / totalSupply ratio to go as high as he wants and then because of rounding error in convertToShares lower amount of share would...

compound could be used by uniswap stakers to maximize fees for AutoPxGmx users

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Anyone can call AutoPxGmx::compound. Hence a staker in the 10000 1% fee uniswap pool can call compound with that pool and take a larger fee from AutoPxGmx users maximizing their gains and griefing users. Proof of Concept fee chooses which uniswap pool to...

A malicious user might call AutoPxGmx.compound() with a higher fee than poolFee.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious user might call AutoPxGmx.compound with a higher fee than poolFee. As a result, there would be a fund loss for the users because they paid more than expected for the swap router. Proof of Concept As we can see here, Uniswap V3 introduces...

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...

EVERY TIME ONCE _execute FUNCTION COMPLETED NEED TO SET isOpen TO 0. OTHERWISE WE CAN CALL EXECUTE FUNCTIONS MULTIMPLE TIMES.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact IN THIS WAY WE CAN CALL AND EXECUTE FUNCTIONS MULTIPLE TIMES . EVERY TIME BEFORE CALL EXECUTE NEED TO CALL INITIALIZE FUNCTIONS. Proof of Concept function executeInput calldata sell, Input calldata buy public payable reentrancyGuard internalCall...