Allowing price updates once in an epoch is extremely risky and open windows to a lot of issues

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Protocol currently knows about how this could be an effect, since the comments to both previewDeposit and convertToShares suggest that any difference attached to this should be considered slippage, but measures are not taken to ensure that this slippage ...

Unsafe message encode and decode for cross chain message transfer and in execution process through axelar

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The cross chain message passing is done through the axelar gateway contracts. To pass the message, the message has to be formatted abi.encode and sent to destination chain from source chain. In destination chain, through gateway contract, the received...

users can mint TT tokens without locking/depositing any currency tokens

Lines of code https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-09-centrifuge/blob/512e7a71ebd9ae76384f837204216f26380c9f91/src/InvestmentManager.solL427-L441...

Blocking assets/shares in escrow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An investor can lose a part of assets or shares due to their blocking in escrow. Proof of Concept Suppose the user decided to invest an amount of assets which is more than typeuint128.max. This can be done by calling the requestDeposit function several...

Not enough valid checks in the Factory.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The LiquidityPoolFactory contract is used to deploy LiquidityPools through a controlled newLiquidityPool , however a vital check is omitted. The newLiquidityPool is first called in the PoolManager.sol but it is not restricted to just that, it can also be...

LiquidityPool inflation attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Bug Description The LiquidityPool uses an algorithm that converts prices to shares through a linear relationship. For instance, if there are 10,000 assets and 100 shares, then holding 100 assets should yield 1 share. However, a situation arises when investor...

An attacker can drain all the tokens from UserEscrow contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An user who is allowed to invest can maliciously drain all the tokens from the UserEscrow contract from decreaseDepositRequest and decreaseRedeemRequest of LiquidityPool.sol contract. Both functions are first send to the router and when the call is...

The Restriction Manager does not completely implement ERC1404 which leads to account that are supposed to be restricted actually have access to do with their tokens as they see fit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Medium, contract's intended logic is for blacklisted users not to be able to interact with their system so as to follow rules set by regulationary bodies in the case where a user does anything that warrants them to be blacklisted, but this is clearly...

InvestmentManager.requestDeposit Arbitrary send erc20

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact InvestmentManager.requestDeposit. In this function, the SafeTransferLib.safeTransferFrom function is called with an arbitrary from address. This means that the attacker can control who the tokens are transferred from. Proof of Concept Tools Used manual...

The current axelar router's implementation can't interact with any calls that requires native tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Medium... this completely blocks off users that would need to call a contract and want to pass value to them, as they can't do this since the functions are not payable Proof of Concept See summary Additionally take a look at the Axelar's Router.sol and s...

possibility of reentrancy attack when poolManger.sol#Transfer called with malicious recipient contract address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact when users calls the transfer function in the poolManger.sol the transaction data will be send to the centrifuge chain first and then it will be back to the router and then direct it to thehandleTransfer function in poolManger.sol, user can make a...

Potential Incorrect Domain Separator Generation in _calculateDomainSeparator Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details The calculateDomainSeparator function generates the EIP-712 domain separator using the contract's name and version. However, there is no explicit guarantee that the name has been set before calling this function, leading to an unreliable domain separator. Impac...

transferIn() is susceptible to a front-running attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Another auth caller can exploit the vulnerability by executing front-running transactions using the source address that has just given allowance approval to the contract. This allows the attacker to acquire and increase the destination amount of the...

New Ward Can Revoke Admin Access

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A Newly added ward can remove all the wards from the system, including the admin one. Proof of Concept There is not a mechanism to prevent newly added wards from removing everyone else access' to the contracts, including the admin. Tools Used Manual...

Unchecked Input

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attackers can get the auth badge due to unchecked input vulnerability at the LiquidityPool The wardmsg.sender badge gives the attacker the highest role in the entire Centrifuge ecosystem, allowing the attacker to steal funds and cause DOS. Proof of Conce...

lack of failsafe mechanism to replay the failed transaction between source chain and destination chain. This would lead to loss of funds to user when transaction is failed.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the transaction fails in any of chain source or destination, it never be replayed. This would lead to loss of assets if the the transaction is target for token transfer. Similarly other issue can happen. Proof of Concept Centrifuge used the cross...

lack of an ownership transfer mechanism

Lines of code Vulnerability details Issue: The code does not have a mechanism to transfer ownership of the contract. In the current implementation, once deployed, the contract owner's address cannot be changed. This can be problematic for contract maintenance and security, as it restricts the...

Assumptions are currently made that prices would forever be positive

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Neglecting the potential for negative asset prices can lead to inaccurate value representation in the Liquidity Pool, possibly affecting calculations related to assets and tokens. It's crucial to note that the value of an asset, even if negative in the...

Contract lacks proper error handling. Without meaningful error messages, it becomes difficult to identify the exact reasons for failures or unexpected behavior. Often leading end user astray.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Contract lacks proper error handling. Without meaningful error messages, it becomes difficult to identify the exact reasons for failures or unexpected behavior. Often leading end user astray. The code lacks proper error handling mechanisms, which can make it...

The executeScheduledRely function in the code allows any external caller to execute it without proper access control checks. This means that anyone can make themselves a ward on a contract without authorization, which poses a security risk.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Issue: The executeScheduledRely function in the code allows any external caller to execute it without proper access control checks. This means that anyone can make themselves a ward on a contract without authorization, which poses a security risk. Proof of...

SafeTransferLib's safeApprove() does not set allowance 0 first which would lead to the escrow encountering issues when dealing with tether's USDT or tokens like it.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Medium... a number of features within the protocol will not work if an approval reverts in the escrow or anywhere else NB: Report mainly focuses on the usage of the SafeTransferLib's safeApprove, but bug is attached to the underlying call made to approve...

Transactions could be frontrun to deposit assets and collect shares between the deposit request and collection

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can spoof deposit to get free shares. Proof of Concept requestDeposit - Requests a deposit, locks up the assets. collectDeposit - Collects the shares after deposit execution. The vulnerability arises because: requestDeposit locks up the assets,...

Signature malleability in permit function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the ERC20 contract used to define the interface for tranche tokens the permit function uses ecrecover to verify a signature submitted by the token owner to approve an address to spend its tranche tokens. However there is a well known issue related to...

Unchecked Minting

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a possibility, an attacker can force minting of tokens to self or any other diluting the token value and stealing funds in the process Proof of Concept Here is a step-by-step process The attacker calls the transferFrom function with msg.data...

Owners having valid permits might not be able to deposit or redeem assets/shares due to incorrect order of address validation in _isValidSignature

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept requestDepositWithPermit requests asset deposit for a receiver to be included in the next epoch execution with a permit option. requestRedeemWithPermit request share redemption for a receiver to be included in the next epoch execution with a...

The price update timestamp doesn't get checked, allowing for the use of stale prices

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It allows for the use of stale prices in cases where they will either damage the protocol or the user. Proof of Concept The protocol has a price oracle system where the price gets updated by an account with a privileged role by calling updatePrice...

requestDeposit and requestRedeem do not allow for any price guarantee, opening users to sandwich attacks and other losses

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Request functions take only the desired input amount as a parameter, giving no way for the caller to control the fulfilment price. The price is decided by the Centrifuge mainnet only. function requestDeposituint256 assets, address owner; function...

No gas payment is done before calling the callContract in the Router.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the Axelar documentation it is specified that before calling callContract or callContractWithToken the user needs to first prepay the relayers gas fee on the source chain, but since the functions are not payable, nor does call...

previewWithdraw doesn't round up the asset amount leading to confusion when external protocols integrate with the vaults of the protocol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Protocols, that integrate with Centrifuge liquidity pools may wrongly assume that withdraw rounds the amount up as per the ERC-4626 specification leading to a wide array or issues for both parties. Proof of Concept The following is stated in the EIP's...

Restriction Manager does not check the source address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The detectTransferRestriction takes in all the necessary parameters: function detectTransferRestrictionaddress from, address to, uint256 value public view returns uint8 However it only performs a check on the address to The restriction used here is...

Users may not redeem the their tranche tokens and suffer loss.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In case of the stablecoin depegging, users may may not redeem the their tranche tokens and suffer loss. Proof of Concept A tranche allows multiple stablecoins to be the currencies that users can deposit to get the tranche tokens. An example would be a...

potential overflow in max.Deposit&maxMint; and max.redeem&max;.withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact there is potential overflow in max.deposit and max.mint Proof of Concept there is only way to decrease max.deposit and max.mint is deposit to be excuted . function deposituint128 trancheTokenAmount, uint128 currencyAmount, address liquidityPool, address...

Already allowed pool currency can not be removed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Already allowed pool currency can not be removed. Once a currency is allowed, it can not be removed. Most of the time, the currency will be a stablecoin but in cases where the stablecoin depegs, as seen with USDC three months ago, new liquidity pools for...

"Divide-by-Zero Risk in convertToShares Function"

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The convertToShares function calculates the number of shares based on the provided assets and the "latestPrice" obtained from the liquidityPool. While the code may appear straightforward, there is a specific security concern related to divide-by-zer...

Allowance manipulation in UserEscrow struct leads to unauthorized token transfers due to overreliance on maximum allowance check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The UserEscrow smart contract contains a vulnerability that can possibly allow unauthorized users to transfer tokens out of the contract. Specifically, an attacker can exploit this flaw by manipulating the allowances, thus enabling them to bypass the...

LiquidityPool.sol doesn't respect fully EIP 4626

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The EIP-4626 states that the function previewMint and previewWithdraw should be rounded up always, but that is not the case in the InvestmentManager.sol which makes it not fully compliant. Proof of Concept As can be seen by EIP-4626 the function...

Rouge ward can remove auth permission from other wards and then remove themselves

Lines of code Vulnerability details In a protocol, the deny function is used to remove the ward permissions from an address. This is actually a serious thing to consider that can actually occur, if a ward contract or account is obtained and other wards are not aware, the rogue ward can actually...

Access Control Dependency on msg.sender: The onlyGateway modifier relies solely on msg.sender for access control. If the address of the gateway contract is compromised or manipulated, it can lead to unauthorized access to critical functions within the contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Access Control Dependency on msg.sender Impact: The onlyGateway modifier relies solely on msg.sender for access control. If the address of the gateway contract is compromised or manipulated, it can lead to unauthorized access to critical functions within the...

Relying on string comparisons to determine which parameter to update in the file() function is brittle and could lead to unintended consequences.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This can allow unintentionally changing sensitive state variables Proof of Concept The vulnerability arises because: file relies on a simple string comparison of the what parameter to determine which state variable to update. A developer could accidental...

Expired members can lose their tranche tokens if they call transferTrancheTokensToCentrifuge or transferTrancheTokensToEVM in PoolManager.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can call transferTrancheTokensToCentrifuge or transferTrancheTokensToEVM to transfer their tranche tokens to other chains, but no verifying is done to see if they are expired members or not on the source chain, which can cause loss of funds for some...

approve function can be frontrun and funds will be stolen as a result

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user that gives allowances will lose funds. Proof of Concept In the file ERC20.sol there is a function approve. This function is problematic as it is susceptible to frontrunning attacks. PoC: Consider the following scenario: Alice calls the function...

Lack of access control lets anyone rescind any delegate token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is no access control for the function rescind, thus 1 it lets anyone rescind any token, either he is the owner or not and 2 the documentation does not adhere to the current implementation. Proof of Concept The documentation above the definition of...

checkERC1155BeforePull Function in DelegateTokenTransferHelpers

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The checkERC1155BeforePull function in Contract XYZ has a potential issue where it reverts if pullAmount is equal to 0, which might not always be the desired behavior for ERC1155 tokens. Issue Details Context In DelegateTokenTransferHelpers.sol, the...

Failure to Return Value from Low-Level Call

Lines of code Vulnerability details In Solidity, the "low-level call" operation, often used with inline assembly, is a powerful tool for interacting with external contracts. However, there is a specific bug related to low-level calls that can result in unexpected behavior. Instances 1: File:...

Expiry time is of no use

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact DelegateToken holder can withdraw before expiry. Even if the principalToken holder extends the time it is of no use. And anyone can withdraw any delegateTokenId and send all the tokens to their address. Proof of Concept The withdraw function in the...

To protect the contract in case of hacking or detection of incorrect operation, it is necessary to add pause and blacklist functions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Cases of hacking and self-identification of errors in contact often occur. To protect the contract in such a case, the pause and blacklist functions in the contract are usually used. This would provide protection for the DelegateToken.sol contract in cas...

Incorrect use of getTokenAmounts causes getReserves / getTVL to be overestimated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Previously, getTVL counted the balance of TokenisableRange and multiplied it by the LP value. After reconstruction, getTVL obtains the balance of token0 and token1 through getTokenAmounts and multiplies the token value. The problem is that when calculati...

Unchecked return value of low level

Lines of code Vulnerability details In the code you provided earlier, there is a potential "Unchecked return value of low-level call" vulnerability in the following line: addressstrategy.delegatecallabi.encodeWithSignature"harvest"; This line of code uses the delegatecall function to invoke the...

DelegateTokenRegistryHelpers::calculateDecreasedAmount() - Comment "Assumes the decreased amount won't underflow with "amount"", but it *can* underflow given the right value for parameter decreaseAmount, and is also inside unchecked {} block.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Summary: Since the affected line is inside an unchecked block, the inbuilt solidity protection functionality wont revert this function execution on underflow, therefore the max uint256 value will be returned for calculateDecreasedAmount. Not only that, b...

CreateOffererLib#createOrderHash function can be front-run by attacker and cause user create order failed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function CreateOffererLibcalculateOrderHashAndId is used to calculate ERC20/ERC721/ERC1155 order hash and delegateTokenId. It create delegateTokenId parameter by calling DelegateTokenStorageHelpersdelegateIdNoRevert function, this function calculate...