Upgraded Q -> 2 from #11 [1685422294441]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 11 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-03:getReward It is recommended to add balance0 before executing transfer getReward will do a transfer on rewaredsToken Since the rewards are from convex, we can't be sure what kind of token it is. we can't be sure...

AmbireAccount implementation can be destroyed by privileges

Lines of code Vulnerability details AmbireAccount implementation can be destroyed by privileges The AmbireAccount implementation can be destroyed, resulting in the bricking of all associated wallets. Impact The AmbireAccount contract has a constructor that setups privileges, these are essentially...

H-100 Unmitigated

Lines of code L1 Vulnerability details test Assessed type call/delegatecall --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #964 [1684819958119]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 964 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L1 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Wrong blocksPerYear calculation in WhitePaperInterestRateModel.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In WhitePaperInterestRateModel.sol, File: contracts/WhitePaperInterestRateModel.sol 17 uint256 public constant blocksPerYear = 2102400; There is wrong calculation of blocksPerYear and blocksPerYear is the approximate number of blocks per year that is...

Unfair handling of rewards for users with a high amount of rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Users can claim their rewards in RewardDistributor.claimRewardToken. The reward handling part is done in grantRewardToken: 416: function grantRewardTokenaddress user, uint256 amount internal returns uint256 417: uint256 rewardTokenRemaining =...

Unspent allowance may break functionality in AMO

Lines of code Vulnerability details Unspent allowance may break functionality in AMO An unspent allowance may cause a denial of service during the calls to safeApprove in the AMO contract. Impact The AMO contract uses the safeApprove function to grant the Curve pool permission to spend funds whil...

User can bypass _ensureMaxLoops check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user can bypass ensureMaxLoops check in Comptroller.sol to add in accountAssets all possible markets through borrow functions of VToken.sol. Proof of Concept The user adds max number of markets through enterMarkets. Then user can add another markets...

Rebalance amounts should be checked so that updated balances falls within thresholds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Rebalance amounts should be checked so that updated balances falls within thresholds Rebalance operations are allowed when the current percentage of xETH in the Curve pool is outside the defined thresholds. However, there is no check to ensure that the amount o...

PositionManager's moveLiquidity can set wrong deposit time and permanently freeze LP funds moved

Lines of code Vulnerability details moveLiquidity set new destination index LP entry deposit time to be equal to the source index deposit time, while destination bucket might have defaulted after that time. This is generally not correct as source bucket bankruptcy is controlled i.e. LP shares tha...

Incorrect Calculation of Max Amount of Quote Tokens in moveLiquidity() Function in PositionManager.sol.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The updateInterest function is called before retrieving the fromPosition value from positionsparams.tokenIdparams.fromIndex in the moveLiquidity function. This means that the bucketDeposit value may not reflect the current accrued interest, which can...

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...

Race condition vulnerability in positionManager minting function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact race condition vulnerability can result in the issuance of duplicate token IDs. When multiple transactions are executed in quick succession attempting to mint tokens, they may end up being assigned the same ID due to a shared counter or variable used to...

high risk issue

Lines of code Vulnerability details Submitting a high risk issue! Assessed type ERC4626 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Mitigation Confirmed for Mitigation of M-05: See comments

Mitigated issue M-05: Missing derivative limit and deposit availability checks will revert the whole stake function The issue was that stake calls deposit on each derivative without considering certain conditions under which some deposit might revert. There is an overlap between this issue and...

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 Medium Lines of code Impact Contract still assumes 1:1 peg for stETH in WstETHwithdraw...

Users can queue a withdrawal and potentially withdraw completely if PAUSED_EIGENPODS_VERIFY_OVERCOMMITTED = false

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users can queue a withdrawal and potentially withdraw completely if PAUSEDEIGENPODSVERIFYOVERCOMMITTED = false Proof of Concept We need to look at two functions. The first one is function verifyOvercommittedStake uint40 validatorIndex,...

anyone can call initialize() functions which can cause lost of funds and contract ownership

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Most of the smart contracts have an initialize function that anyone can call as initialize function visibility is either external or public. This could lead to a race condition when the contract is deployed. At that moment a hacker or attacker could call...

HexUtils.hexStringToBytes32 does not exclude the last index in str

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The HexUtils.hexStringToBytes32 intends to exclude the lastIdx index in the input str. See the @param comment for lastIdx parameter: / @dev Attempts to parse bytes32 from a hex string @param str The string to parse @param idx The offset to start parsing ...

HexUtils.hexStringToBytes32 successfully processes data with invalid input indexes

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The HexUtils.hexStringToBytes32 never validates the idx and lastIdx input index values. function hexStringToBytes32 bytes memory str, uint256 idx, uint256 lastIdx internal pure returns bytes32 r, bool valid valid = true; assembly // check that the index ...

length OF THE BYTES ARRAY IS NOT CHECKED BEFORE SUBSTRING IS EXTRACTED FROM IT, WHICH COULD LEAD TO SUBSTRING OF bytes(0)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In RRUtils.readDNSKEY function, if the length == 4 then the self.publicKey will be an empty bytes array. No check is performed to validata the length variable. This will return the public key of the DNSKEY as an empty bytes array. Check should be perform...

OffchainDNSResolver Contract Missing onlyOwner Modifier in Constructor Can Lead to DNS Hijacking Attacks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The OffchainDNSResolver contract has a security vulnerability where it doesn't have a safeguard called the onlyOwner modifier in its constructor, this means that anyone can deploy the contract. This could allow a bad actor to create a version of the...

DNS wire format AND DNS label-sequence format ARE USED INTERCHANGABLY TO REPRESENT DOMAIN NAMES DURING RRSet VALIDATION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact @param name The name to claim, in DNS wire format. above format is used in DNSRegistrar.proveAndClaim and DNSRegistrar.proveAndClaimWithResolver functions @param name The name of the RRSIG record, in DNS label-sequence format. above format is used in...

Anyone can call enableNode and set a node resolver

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The lack of access control allows anyone to call the enableNode function and set the ENS resolver to the resolver set in DNSRegistrar if it has not been set before, or it belongs to the previous registrar set on the contract. This results in any unset no...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #830 [1682357430454]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 830 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: unstake in safETH would be blocked if any derivative gets blocked during withdraw The system essentially comes to a halt if any of stETH/frxETH/rETH stops their withdrawal. function unstakeuint256 safEthAmount extern...

An attacker whose a 3% shareholder can wipe-out all the tokens of anyone using a flash-loan

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A 3% votes holder can wipe the equity of any other holder using the restructureCapTable function. Proof of Concept 1. a Be a 3% votes holder or have helpers that together have 3% 2. b Reduce the equity to be less than MINIMUMEQUITY This could be done by...

function restructureCapTable() in Equity.sol not functioning as expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorrect typo in function restructureCapTable leading to only burning tokens of first address of addressToWipe array arguement. Proof of Concept Here, in L313, addressToWipe0 only takes first address of the array. While ignoring the rest and also since...

The minter can steal the Frankencoin in notifyLoss()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The minter can steal the Frankencoin in notifyLoss because of In this code: if reserveLeft = amount transferaddressreserve, msg.sender, amount; The minter can call the function notifyLoss Constantly. When reserveLeft = amount, the minter who call the fir...

ETHCrowdfundBase._finalize() calculates the total voting power wrongly.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact After the crowdfund is finalized, the party wouldn't work properly because total voting power is greater than the sum of all voters' voting power. In the worst case, any proposal including the distribution one wouldn't be executed because it doesn't meet...

Incorrect calculation of virtualBaseTokenReserves leads to incorrect pricing of NFTs

Lines of code Vulnerability details virtualBaseTokenReserves is recalculated every time a buy or sell operation is performed. The calculation is done incorrectly, so the next time a sale is made the price will be updated incorrectly. Impact buy and sell operations will be performed with incorrect...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #17 [1681332048307]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 17 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-07 First user that stakes again after a period without stakers receives too many rewards The MuteAmplifier contract pays out rewards on a per second basis. Let's assume there is only 1 staker which is Bob. Say Bob...

Owner lowering max payout might break the MuteBonds contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details The maxPayout variable can be changed by the owner at any time. In case the owner lowers the maxPayout and the payoutTotal of the current epoch is greater than the new maxPayout the contract will be broken - no further deposit can be made, and most of the view...

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. /...

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...

WstEth slippage and fee stealing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The WstEth derivative contract calculates the maximum slippage for buying WstEth from curve pool by using the current price in the pool at runtime, without considering the price at which the user submitted the transaction to the mempool: uint256 minOut =...

ProfilePicture subprotocol is immutably linked by subprotocolName to the CID protocol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Besides having to re-register the protocol, it will also have to be redeployed. Proof of Concept A protocol is registered by name in the SubprotocolRegistry. Quoting the Canto Identity Protocol contest details: "In theory, someone can front-run a call to...

set critical parameters like fee recipient in constrctor.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Loss of fee at certain condition. This can happen, when user call deposit function immediately contracts are deployed. Or when admin forget to update the feeReceient address. There are lot of address that admin has to set once the contract is deployed. S...

Tray tile characterIndex values (via PRNG) can be manipulated by miners

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By manipulating the ordering of transactions in blocks, miners could manipulate the characterIndex values of a Tray's tiles. This could result in miners being able to specifically select characterIndex values that they want for specific Tray tiles, rathe...

Exchange.sol#L87 : openTrade is returning incorrect totalCost value which has accounting issue when open or closing the trade.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It returns the incorrect value. Any operation done based on this function,either at front end of at contract level , could end with incorrect output. Proof of Concept User can interact with Exchangle.sol to trade. He/she will call the openTrade. openTrad...

Lack of token approval reverts the overall trade

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since the user has not approved the params.collateralAmount, calling the safeTransferFrom function will result in a revert due to the lack of token approval. The Exchange contract not receive any collateralAmount. Proof of Concept...

Namespace fuse ignores font class attribute from tile data

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The fuse function present in the Namespace contract mints a new Namespace NFT based on the given character data that references Tray tiles owned by the caller. For each character, the implementation will use the characterToUnicodeBytes function from the...

Incorrect use of the && Operator will allow anyone to fuse a new Namespace NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any caller can easily mint NFT if they provide a valid list of characters with the appropriate trays, the problem with this code is in this check if trayOwner != msg.sender && tray.getApprovedtrayID != msg.sender && !tray.isApprovedForAlltrayOwner,...

A user can mint a PFP NFT multiple times using the same _nftId

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A user might unintentionally "intentionally" try to take advantage of the mint function in ProfilePicture.sol Proof of Concept The pfp mapping stores the pfp data per NFT, L31-32 of Profilepicture.sol /// @notice Stores the pfp data per NFT mappinguint25...

bootloader doesn't add tighter gas limit to the IAccount.validateTransaction call

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As mentioned in the competition details: Important, while the bootloader is out of scope, we may reward an additional bounty for valid bugs found in it by our judgement! As mentioned in the dev document, , there are some limitations of the verification a...

ProfilePictureData is not stored, which will cause serious logic errors

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All data minted by the contract will not be stored, paralyzing the entire contract Proof of Concept code snippet： function mintaddress nftContract, uint256 nftID external uint256 tokenId = ++numMinted; if ERC721nftContract.ownerOfnftID != msg.sender reve...

Anyone can steal funds in the Contract Deployer

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If ContractDeployer.sol ever holds funds, it could potentially be drained via the chained creation of new contracts. Proof of Concept When creating a contract the create/create2 functions will be called inside the contract deployer here: , which after...

Unchecked msg.value will lead to losing funs inside the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact While paying for the transaction, function payForTransaction bytes32, // txHash bytes32, // suggestedSignedHash Transaction calldata transaction external payable ignoreNonBootloader ignoreInDelegateCall //@audit-issue no checks that actulayy there is...

Possible loss of funds when withdrawing from L2 to L1

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Context To initiate a withdrawal from L2 to L1, a user can call L2EthToken.withdraw method, then funds will be available to calim on L1 via finalizeEthWithdrawal method of MailboxFacet. function withdrawaddress l1Receiver external payable override The...

Unclaimed rewards will be stuck unrecoverable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The vulnerability relies in: unchecked uint256 share = points PRECISION / pool.totalPoints totalReward; uint256 daoShare = share pool.daoTax / 100 DIVISOR; share /= PRECISION; daoShare /= PRECISION; return share - daoShare, daoShare; The problem is that ...

Unvalidated input in setManagerRight function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The setManagerRight function takes managedRight and managerRight as inputs without validating them This could potentially lead to unexpected results if the input values are not what the function expects. Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps Provide...