Possibility of losing users funds due to not checking for zero address (address 0x0)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact As there is no function for checking whether the addresses of the sources and targets are zero or not in the delegateMulti function it may cause issues for users Sending tokens to a zero address address 0x0 is generally not a recommended practice in...

No check proxy contract is deployed

Lines of code Vulnerability details The deployProxyDelegatorIfNeeded function in ERC20MultiDelegate.sol does not verify that a proxy contract has been successfully deployed before emitting an event indicating its creation. Impact Both createProxyDelegatorAndTransfer and processDelegation function...

Limit accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity calls to prevent reward manipulation.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It may be possible for a user to artificially increase their tracked liquidity right before claiming by rapidly entering/exiting positions. This could allow them to claim a larger % of rewards than they deserve. Proof of Concept The main risk of...

Airdropped Gas will remain in the Agent in case of failure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol uses LayerZeros Airdrop mechanism to send gas to BridgeAgents which they need to pay for subsequential cross-chain-messages. If the transaction on the receiver fails, this airdropped gas will remain in the BridgeAgent and can be used up by t...

Access control check in the setAmbRewards and setAmbRewards functions is missing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Any user can call the setAmbRewards and setAmbRewards functions and set their values for weeklyReward, which opens up many attack vectors. For example, it is possible to set a large reward and withdraw all funds from the protocol. Proof of Concept functi...

[M-14] Reentrancy in the RootBridgeAgent contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a Re-entrancy attack, a malicious contract calls back into the calling contract before the first invocation of the function is finished. This may cause the different invocations of the function to interact in undesirable ways, especially in cases wher...

Existing pools will be bricked due to uninitialized state

Lines of code Vulnerability details Existing pools will be bricked due to uninitialized Summary Pools already present in the exchange will be bricked when crossTicks is called with an uninitialized tickTracking storage, which will trigger an array out of bounds error. Impact New pools in the...

A Malicious user can create a rootBridgeAgent with a malicious endpoint and execute calls directly with the rootBridgeAgent.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A Malicious user can create a rootBridgeAgent with a malicious endpoint and execute calls directly with the rootBridgeAgent. Since anyone can create a rootBridgeAgent with desired values for port, endpoint and router address in anychain. The Attacker can...

Incorrect functionID will not trigger fallback

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When encoding a payload for settlement of multiple tokens, the fallback flag is not set when it should be. This will cause no fallback to be triggered even though the user has paid enough to cover the additional costs that are required. Proof of Concept ...

Slippage attack on claiming rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Exploiter can abuse slippage to claim more weekly reward. The amount of slippage damage is unclear due to lack of deployment context and testing. Worst case scenario is the exploiter own 100% deposit of single pool allowing extreme slippage to steal enti...

Mismatch of decimals for some underlying tokens across chains could cause a huge loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The issue is, some ERC20 underlying tokens could have different decimals on other chains. For example, USDC in BNB chain has 18 decimals where it has 6 decimals in other chains such as Ethereum, Polygon ...etc. The root chain doesn't account for decimals...

Reentrancy is possible in claim functions, which call out via .call().

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reentrancy is possible in claim functions, which call out via .call. Proof of Concept The claimConcentratedRewards Function & claimAmbientRewards Function The claim functions that are vulnerable to reentrancy are: For...

No access control on protocolCmd and userCmd; potential for abuse.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no access control on the protocolCmd and userCmd functions in LiquidityMiningPath. This means anyone can call them. There should be some checks to restrict access. The protocolCmd and userCmd functions are defined on LiquidityMiningPath.sol: /...

[M-15] Reentrancy in the BranchPort contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a Re-entrancy attack, a malicious contract calls back into the calling contract before the first invocation of the function is finished. This may cause the different invocations of the function to interact in undesirable ways, especially in cases wher...

if the Virtual Account's owner is a Contract Account (multisig wallet), attackers can gain control of the Virtual Accounts by gaining control of the same owner's address in a different chain

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attackers can gain control of User's Virtual Accounts and steal all the assets these accounts hold in the Root environment Proof of Concept When sending signed messages from a Branch to Root, the RootBridgeAgent contract calls the...

If dt is not updated accurately then timeWeightedWeeklyPositionInRangeConcLiquidity_ might be updated incorrectly.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the function accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity, inside the while block, dt is initialised as: uint32 dt = uint32 nextWeek If tickTracking.exitTimestamp != 0 then the following else block is executed on line 117: else // Tick is no longer...

Unvalidated ticks in claimConcentratedRewards allow unauthorized users to claim undeserved rewards. Validate ticks.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no check that the ticks passed into claimConcentratedRewards actually match the position's ticks. A user could pass in arbitrary ticks to try to claim rewards for liquidity they don't own. Proof of Concept The claimConcentratedRewards function...

Users may be unable to claim their rewards and add/remove liquidity due exceeding gas limit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a user provides liquidity on ticks which are entered and exited a large number of times, the gas required to call the accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity can exceed the block gas limit. Proof of Concept The...

The while loop used in all the accrueXXXPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity function could make a call reach the block gas limit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept If a user neither modifies his position nor claims rewards for a very long time, it might become impossible for him to do any action involving the internal functions accrueAmbientPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity or...

Time-weighted liquidity accounting assumes consecutive activity; double counting possible, needs validation.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Time-weighted liquidity accounting in accrueConcentratedPositionTimeWeightedLiquidity and similar functions assumes ticks were active consecutively between entry/exit timestamps. However, a tick could exit and re-enter in the same week, leading to double...

VirtualAccount::payableCall is missing access control

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The lack of access control in VirtualAccount::payableCall function allows anyone to execute arbitrary calls with any contract from a user's VirtualAccount. This enables malicious actors to steal user's funds easily, ultimately resulting in a...

Unexpected behavior when settings rewards for existing pools or past/ongoing periods

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary There are different missing considerations in the liquidity mining process that may lead to unexpected behavior due to failed assumptions. Impact The liquidity mining feature is mainly implemented by tracking liquidity at a global level the aggregation ...

Use of flashloan to inflate timeWeightedWeeklyGlobalAmbLiquidity_[poolIdx][currWeek] and timeWeightedWeeklyPositionAmbLiquidity_[poolIdx][posKey][currWeek]

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is possible for a bad player to use flashloan to manipulate the system by making "valuable" LP to get lower reward than expected, while they get a minimal reward for a liquidity provided that offers no "value" to Ambient DEX. This attack will thrive...

Using .call for external calls leaves the contract vulnerable to reentrancy.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact claimConcentratedRewards and claimAmbientRewards call external contracts via call. This could leave the contract vulnerable to reentrancy attacks if the recipient contract calls back into the contract before updating state. Proof of Concept The calls to...

CoreRootRouter.executeDepositSingle FUNCTION REVERTS FOR SINGLE ASSETS DEPOSITS THUS FAILING THE TRANSACTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The RootBridgeAgent.lzReceiveNonBlocking function calls the respective RootBridgeAgentExecutor functions based on the flag parsed via the payload0. The payload0 == 0x02 stands for the Call with Deposit remote call. The...

Virtual account lacks access control

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Virtual Account lacks access control on a function that allows arbitrary calls. This enables anyone to take any assets contained within the account. Proof of Concept The Virtual account has the requiresApprovedCaller modifier to prevent use from...

BranchBridgeAgent.retrieveDeposit doesn't check if the deposit is in FAILED state

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The BranchBridgeAgent.retrieveDeposit function is supposed to be called for retrieving a failed deposit in order to get funds back to branch chain, but the function doesn't check that the deposit being used is really in FAILED state, so a malicious user...

[M-17] Reentrancy in the BranchBridgeAgent contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a Re-entrancy attack, a malicious contract calls back into the calling contract before the first invocation of the function is finished. This may cause the different invocations of the function to interact in undesirable ways, especially in cases wher...

ChainLink should be used as an Oracle for messaging instead of Google Cloud

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Each User Application contract e.g. BranchBidgeAgent built on LayerZero will work without configuration using defaults, but a UA will also be able to configure its own. Maia intends to use the default config. However, Google Cloud Oracle is the default a...

Global and Position liquidity accrual can significantly impact the performance

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Global and Position liquidity accrual can significantly impact the performance Proof of Concept The calculation of currWeek and nextWeek as shown in the provided code snippet aims to determine two time points within a week, primarily for the purpose of...

USAGE OF abi.encodePacked TO ENCODE DATA COULD LEAD TO payload DATA COLLISION IN THE RootBridgeAgent._createSettlementMultiple FUNCTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The RootBridgeAgent.callOutAndBridgeMultiple function is used to settle multiple assets and perform a remote call to a branch chain. callOutAndBridgeMultiple function calls the RootBridgeAgent.createSettlementMultiple internal function to compute the...

Rewards cannot be transferred when calling protocol command

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary Rewards are set up using protocol commands, but it's entrypoint is not payable. Impact Rewards can be set up by protocol authorities using the functions setConcRewards and setAmbRewards present in the LiquidityMiningPath contracts. These two are part of...

Liquidity providers may recieve wrong rewards due to loss of precision in the calculation of currWeek and nextWeek.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Throughout LiquidityMining.sol the values for currWeek and nextWeek are generated using the lastAccrued timestamp embedded in a local variable time. currWeek is determined by uint32 currWeek = uint32time / WEEK WEEK; And nextWeek is calculated by uint32 nextWee...

if lzReceiveNonBlocking failed to execute , they don't send back ,accumulated msg.value . malicious user drain that

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact PerformFallBack is gonna fail and msg.value will be accumulated in that BranchBridgeAgent and malicious user can take over them Proof of Concept User deposited and When it's not executed ,user want to retrieve and callRetrieveSettlement ,send message to...

[M-16] Reentrancy in the BaseBranchRouter contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In a Re-entrancy attack, a malicious contract calls back into the calling contract before the first invocation of the function is finished. This may cause the different invocations of the function to interact in undesirable ways, especially in cases wher...

Gas that was sent by LayerZero can get stuck in the contract in some cases

Lines of code Vulnerability details If a tx on the destination chain calls back the chain from where the transaction was initiated by the user, the first transaction on the source chain needs to "airdrop" gas to the destination chain so it is able to call back the source chain. The problem is tha...

Functions can be called directly externally

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact @dev This exists as a standalone contract but will only ever contain proxy code, not state. As such it should never be called directly or externally, and should only be invoked with DELEGATECALL so that it operates on the contract state within the primar...

code written in MulticallRootRouter.sol is wrong .

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 0x01 |...

Lack of Access Control in public function VirtualAccount.payableCall

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The VirtualAccount contract allows users to manage assets and perform interactions remotely while maintaining an encapsulated user balance. The contract includes a payableCall function that aggregates and executes a batch of calls to external...

VirtualAccount.sol CONTRACT DOES NOT CORRECTLY IMPLEMENT THE eip1155 STANDARD WHILE INHERITING THE ERC1155Receiver

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The VirtualAccount.sol contract inherits the ERC1155Receiver contract to receive the ERC1155 tokens. Both onERC1155Received and onERC1155BatchReceived functions are declared in the VirtualAccount contract as per the eip1155 standard. The respective ERC11...

CoreRootRouter._setLocalToken FUNCTION COULD OVERWRITE THE EXISTING VALUES OF THE getLocalTokenFromGlobal MAPPING VALUES DUE TO LACK OF CONDITIONAL CHECKS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The CoreRootRouter.setLocalToken function is used to set the local token on a specific chain for a global token. The function initially checks whether the local token is is already added as shown below: if IPortrootPortAddress.isLocalTokenlocalAddress,...

RootBridgeAgent.retrieveSettlement doesn't check if settlement is in FAILED state

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The RootBridgeAgent.retrieveSettlement function is supposed to be used to retrieve a failed settlement to be able to redeem it but because the function doesn't actually check that the input settlement is in fact in FAILED state, the function can be used ...

Incorrect srcAddress check renders all layerzero messages unusable

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The source address of LayerZero messages is validated on a wrong part of the calldata, which will cause all cross-chain-messages to fail on a live deployment. Proof of Concept The receivers of cross-chain-messages BranchBridgeAgent and RootBridgeAgent bo...

THE RETURN BOOLEAN VALUE OF THE excessivelySafeCall FUNCTION IS NOT CHECKED IN THE BranchBridgeAgent.lzReceive FUNCTION

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The BranchBridgeAgent.lzReceive function is used to send cross-chain messages using the layer zero messaging layer. The lzReceive function uses the excessivelySafeCall library on the same contract address addressthis to ensure the layer zero cross chain...

LiquidityMining.claimConcentratedRewards() does not properly account user liquidity across ticks

Lines of code Vulnerability details Let’s say a user creates two separate positions, one is tick-15, tick and the second is tick, tick+15. The user is covering the entirety of the tick range to receive rewards but does not receive any. We see that posKey is defined like this: bytes32 posKey =...

LiquidityMining.sol cannot be funded for rewards distribution.

Lines of code Vulnerability details During a rewards claim LiquidityMining.sol uses a low-level call with the msg.value as the rewardsToSend to the liquidity providers, but the contract lacks a receive or fallback function for funds be deposited in it, leaving the contract empty and unable to sen...

Lack of proper access restrictions on functions setConcRewards() and setAmbRewards()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contract Reward distribution can be drained / manipulated Proof of Concept For setConcRewards and setAmbRewards, they are both lack of proper access restrictions, leads to the situation that anyone can execute these functions. This oversight presents a...

DoS in System Component lead to System Failure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Proof Of Concept Tools Used Recommended Mitigation Steps Assessed type DoS --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

deleted

Lines of code Vulnerability details deleted Assessed type Other --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Lack of validation allows invalid ticks, impacting data integrity.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function crossTicks updates the tick tracking data when ticks are crossed, but does not validate that exitTick and entryTick are valid and make sense. For example, exitTick could be lower than entryTick. Proof of Concept Here is the relevant code in the...