Wrong input hash given to decodeType function in CreateOffererHelpers library

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The RegistryHashes.decodeType function is supposed to take a specific bytes32 hash as input with an encoded token type in the last bytes to know token type is used, but when this function is called in the CreateOffererHelpers library it is given a simple...

An attacker can use the flashloan() function without real collateral assets

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Function flashloan - allows delegate token owner or approved operator to borrow their underlying tokens for the duration of a single atomic transaction. The function uses Structs.FlashInfo calldata info as an input parameter. However, some parameters fro...

User funds may be blocked if tokens with a transfer fee are used as the underlyingToken

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The user can create rights token pair pulling underlying token. To do this, it calls the create function . During the execution of the function, the user sends tokens to the contract address . If an ERC20 token is used as a tokenContract, then the...

Malicious caller tcan o pass arrays with more than 1 element to exploit the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This can lead to assets being trapped in the contract or transferred improperly. Proof of Concept This expects and enforces that minimumReceived and maximumSpent will only have 1 element each. A malicious caller could call with arrays like: minimumReceiv...

Protocol will fail for ERC1155 tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Issue DelegateTokenTransferHelpers::checkERC1155BeforePull and DelegateTokenTransferHelpers::pullERC1155AfterCheck perform "set and check" operations on erc1155Pulled.flag which will always revert. In the first function, the value of erc1155Pulled.flag is set t...

M-08 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Comments The success of low-level calls is not checked in V3Proxy. If msg.sender is a contract and the fallback function has additional logic, the protocol will succeed transfer by default, which will result in the loss of user funds. Mitigation There is no...

H-01 Unmitigated

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

lack of address(0) check for oracle address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact no oracle no updated prices. Not sure what happens if try to call getPrice in this scenario, but IF it returns price of zero, then number of tokens from getRUSDYByShares will be zero for any amount of USDY shares... Proof of Concept Tools Used Recommende...

Reorgs could revert the setRange function and lead to a long lasting stale price of USDY

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary Reorgs could revert the setRange function and therefore lead to stale prices for a long time depending on the off chain protection, against it Vulnerability Details Here is the setRange function of the USDY price oracle: function setRange uint256...

Minted Shares would be Inflate Shares by 10000 due to Math Error in the wrap function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact BPSDENOMINATOR in the rUSDY.sol contract is an important variable used to scale up usdy amount - shares as noted in it comment description but it is only used to scale up when minting shares but not scaled down before subtracting it from total shares and...

A user with the BURNER_ROLE role should be able to burn rUSDY tokens from the balance of a blocked address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There are functions for blocking users: setBlocklist - setAllowlist - setSanctionsList - Suppose the user has rUSDY tokens. Then it was added to the blocklist. His tokens will then be blocked. There is a burn function where you can burn rUSDY tokens from...

Funds will be lost in case the block reorg occurs on the chain of sending bridge

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Funds will be lost in case the block reorg occurs on the chain of sending bridge Proof of Concept consider the following scenerio on sending chain: In block 1: Alice sends the 1000 tokens to the destination bridge and the nonce for it is set to 10 In blo...

Stealing extra mint fund by applying reentrancy attack on _execute with calling approve() again due to external call before crucial state update

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By applying reentrancy attack involving the function mintIfThresholdMet, an user can steal extra amount of mint fund. Proof of Concept The functions mintIfThresholdMet make external mint call prior to updating the txnHashToTransaction state. If the real...

Lack of an option in DestinationBridge.sol to cancel a transaction can lead to unwanted transactions

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact DestinationBridge.sol is for handling calls from Axelar Gateway and must be deployed in the destination chain. DestinationBridge.sol requires that the address from which Axelar messages are sent must be registered in the recipient's contract. Once a...

Owner cannot rescueToken if blocklisted.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Token could be stuck if owner is blocklisted by the token. Proof of Concept rescueToken can be used to rescue token sent to the contracts. function rescueTokensaddress token external onlyOwner uint256 balance = IRWALiketoken.balanceOfaddressthis;...

In DestinationBridge:rescueTokens function the owner can steal user tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary In the rescueToken function, it opens the door to potential insecurity for user funds because it lacks additional conditions specifying which types of tokens or under what conditions the onlyOwner can use this function. The function looks like: / @notic...

User will loss his funds forever if Threshold are not met .

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact mintIfThresholdMet function is called from execute function while executing a bridging transaction . This function checks if thresholds are met and only mints token in the destination chain to the user if thresholds are met properly . However , the probl...

Users will not receive on Token on Destination chain because the internal _executeWithToken(...) function is not implemented.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Loss of tokens on the Destination chain. Proof of Concept The DestinationBridge.sol contract inherits AxelarExecutable.sol which has the executeWithToken... that's called at the end of executeWithToken... function. The executeWithToken... is not...

UniswapV3 trading fees are always locked in treasury instead of going back to the protocol users through GeVault

Lines of code Vulnerability details TokenisableRange was redesigned to redirect collected fees to a pre-defined GeVault, where the protocol stakers can benefit from the added value. However, the use of an incorrect variable makes this distribution of the fees impossible to happen, and the fees wi...

Discrepancy in Token Allowance After Rebase Events

Lines of code Vulnerability details The function returns the number of tokens that spender is allowed to spend on behalf of owner. However, in the context of tokens with rebase mechanisms, the owner's balance can dynamically change without explicit transactions. The described behavior might lead ...

guardian multisig should be timelock

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Per the rUSDYFactory.sol, The Natspec states the guardian address is a multsig address which will be passed in constructor during deployement of factory contract. @notice guardian address in constructor is a msig. and constructoraddress guardian guardian...

Insufficient Gas Fee Estimation Leading to Incomplete Transactions

Lines of code Vulnerability details The contract allows a user to send Ether, presumably for transaction fees or gas. However, there is no mechanism in place to verify that the msg.value is sufficient to cover the actual gas cost for contract execution. Consequently, a scenario could arise where...

Transaction origin check in ROE Markets make Options positions opened by contract users impossible to reduce or close

Lines of code Vulnerability details This issue was present in the original contest but I did not notice it as I did not have time to review OptionsPositionManager. The Roe Markets LendingPool.sol that OptionsPositionManager uses is a modified version of Aave V2 with an added PMTransfer...

Potential Out of Bound Error When Accessing Range Array

Lines of code Vulnerability details The code seems to be attempting to access an element of the 'ranges' array using an index calculated from the array's length minus one. However, during the deployment or initialization of the contract, if the length of 'ranges' is 1, this calculation results in...

Cross-chain smart contract call can revert and burned tokens in source chain can't be recovered

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary AXELARGATEWAY.callContract doesn't revert on failure in destination chain , execute function can revert for varies reasons such as not passing require statements, or low gas so tokens remained burned in source chain and can't be recovered . Impact Loss ...

Lack of Post-Allowance Verification Before Token Minting

Lines of code Vulnerability details The code checks if the user txn.sender is allowed via the ALLOWLIST. If not, it sets the user's status to "allowed". However, after this step, there's no subsequent verification to ensure the user has indeed been added to the ALLOWLIST before minting tokens to...

Incorrect initialization of rUSDY.sol

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rUSDY.sol contract inherits PausableUpgradeable contract but does not invoke its initialzers during its own initialization. Due to which the state of PausableUpgradeable contract remain uninitialized. File: contracts/usdy/rUSDY.sol contract rUSDY is...

No zero address check on constructor parameters in contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding There is no address0 check in the constructor of the following contracts; 1. Sourcesbridge.sol 2. rSUDY.sol 3. Destination ridge.sol 4. rSUDYFactory.sol Lack of addr0 check can lead to loss of important...

Incorrect calculation of totalSupply(), balanceOf() in rUSDY.sol if the rate is unlinked from $1

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In rUSDY.sol, the functions totalSupply, balanceOf are calculated. totalSupply : function totalSupply public view returns uint256 return totalShares oracle.getPrice / 1e18 BPSDENOMINATOR; balanceOf : function balanceOfaddress account public view returns...

Precision Error in getPrice due to Omission of Last Day's Interest

Lines of code Vulnerability details The code attempts to calculate the price based on the interest from the previous day by using range.end - 1. However, if the last day represented by range.end has fully passed, the interest for this day is never taken into account. Over time, these slight...

M-08 Unmitigated

Lines of code Vulnerability details The original issue M-08: Return value of low level call not checked, in scope for the mitigation review, was not acted upon, most likely overlooked during the fixing phase. Assessed type call/delegatecall --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors...

Lack of Oracle Price Validation in rUSDY

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary Ondo's custom oracle, RWADynamicOracle, is responsible for delivering the price of USDY to the rUSDY token contract. The oracle is called in four different functions for the price of USDY; the results of which are also used in core functions in the toke...

Low level calls to accounts with no code will succeed in multiexcall function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Low level calls behave differently than function calls in Solidity. Calls at the EVM level to accounts with no code are successful, this is the expected and normal behavior. It is Solidity that adds checks to prevent accidental calls to accounts with no...

The rUSDY.transferFrom function can cause reentrancy if is a contract been approved

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The rUSDY.transferFrom function can cause reentrancy if is a contract been approved, the function looks like: function transferFrom address sender, address recipient, uint256 amount public returns bool uint256 currentAllowance = allowancessendermsg.sende...

Wrong tick selected by GeVault.getActiveTickIndex()

Lines of code Vulnerability details During mitigation of M-03, the function getActiveTickIndex has been completely rewritten. The new logic uses the following statement to identify the active ticker that represents the Uniswap V3 liquidity pool actively traded: if baseTokenIsToken0 && amt0 == 0 |...

_execute can be reorder a batch of commands while executing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lets see what is written in by Axelar: AxelarGatewayMultisig.execute takes a signed batch of commands. Each command has a corresponding commandID. This is guaranteed to be unique from the Axelar network. execute intentionally allows retrying a commandID ...

Loss of token if a smart contract perform a cross-chain transfer using source bridge

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Loss of a token ownership if a smart contract perform a cross-chain transfer using source bridge Proof of Concept When a caller call burnAndCallAxelar, the token is burnt on source chain and the payload is encoded in this way: bytes memory payload =...

Potential Out-of-Bounds Error When Modifying Ranges

Lines of code Vulnerability details The method allows for the modification of a range based on an index. However, there's no explicit check to ensure that the provided indexToModify is within the bounds of the ranges array. If an out-of-bounds index is provided, the method will throw a generic...

Wrong calculation of elapsed days

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For a certain period of time, the dailyIr is compounded every day. However, when calculating prevClosePrice, the last day's addition is missed. The formula for calculating the current price is as follows: Range.dailyInterestRate Days Elapsed + 1...

The USDT.sol contract does not accrue additional income in the form of rUSDY tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rUSDY is the rebasing variant of USDY token, and is heavily based on other rebasing tokens such as stETH. Users are able to acquire rUSDY tokens by calling the wrapuint256 function on the contract. Where as the price of a single USDY token varies over...

In the event of a fall in the price of USDY, the withdrawal of funds for the user may be blocked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a wrap function called by users to wrap their USDY tokens . In the future, to withdraw tokens, the user calls the unwrap function . However, in the unwrap function, the user can have more funds in case the price of USDY falls. Based on the case...

Missing Slippage Protection in unwrap function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Summary The unwrap function swaps rUSDY to USDY and calls the oracle during these process to get the current USDY price. There is no slippage protection implemented, which can lead to loss of funds. Vulnerability Details Unexpected changes between the call to t...

Updating closed ranges with overrideRange() causes incorrect prevRangeClosePrice.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Incorrect starting prices for ranges Incorrect historical price derivations Loss of accurate price data history Proof of Concept updating closed ranges with overrideRange can cause an incorrect prevRangeClosePrice value. Here is a more detailed...

All the funds will be lost if the destination bridge is paused

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Destination bridge is pausable, so if for a chain a destination bridge is paused, all the funds being bridged from different source bridges from different chains will be lost. Proof of Concept Destination bridge inherits from the openzeppelin pausable.so...

Tokens transferred with bridge can get lost if destination transaction can’t be executed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User could lost his tokens, if tx on destination chain will failrevert. There is no option to recover the tokens on source chain. Revert could be cause by function attachThreshold. This function finds the correspondence between the amount and threshhold...

Token recipient is an inaccessible address for contracts

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The msg.sender address from the SourceBridge.burnAndCallAxelar function is used by the DestinationBridge.mintIfThresholdMet function as the TOKEN recipient. However, the msg.sender address will not be controllable by contracts on L2, so any tokens will b...

Price Manipulation Through Vulnerability in simulateRange Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The simulateRange function, although designed for simulation and testing purposes, could potentially be exploited in a sandwich attack scenario. A malicious actor could front-run a user's transaction by using a flash loan to manipulate the price,...

Rounding in the unwrap function in rUSDY may cause fund loss for users.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Rouding with BPSDENOMINATOR in function unwrap in rUSDY.sol may cause users to be transfered back less than expected USDY. POC The rUSDY.sol contract provides a way to wrap an amount of USDY as shares in order to gain profit in rUSDY. This is done throug...

No removal mechanism from blocklist, allowlist and sanctionsList

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact rUSDY.sol has setBlocklist sets the blocklist address, setAllowlist sets the allowlist address, and setSanctionsList sets the sanctions list address functions: However, the mechanism for removing addresses from arrays is not implemented anywhere. Even in...

The user will receive more/less funds when calling unwrap() if the price of USDY falls/rises than expected

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a wrap function called by users to wrap their USDY tokens . In the future, to withdraw tokens, the user calls the unwrap function . However, in the unwrap function, the user can have more funds in case the price of USDY falls. Based on the case...