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 =...

[H-01] RETH oracle manipulation allows attacker to steal funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Asymmetry SafEth protocol aims to help diversify and decentralize liquid staking derivatives, exchanging ether staked in the protocol for staked ether derivative tokens based on some relative weighting. A function exposed by these derivative wrapper...

Derivative Pool Issue can Lead to Loss User Funds when Unstaking

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In all withdraw functions of derivatives, there is no check for sending zero Ether back to the safEth contract. It is important to note that the addressmsg.sender.callvalue: 0"" function returns true even when transferring a zero value. On the other hand...

Reth deposit conditionally relies on unreliable price source.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Deposits are exposed to unnecessary risk by using Uni v3 Weth/Reth Pool as an oracle. It is also possible for staking to be inoperable due to over/underflow. Proof of Concept In the event of !poolCanDepositmsg.value in Reth.sol deposit, this derivative...

And all this assembly shall know that the OWNER SafEth not with derivatives: for the derivative is the OWNER'S, and he will rebalanceToWeights it into his EOA.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The owner of SafEth can at any time steal all staked funds. Proof of Concept SafEth.addDerivative allows the owner to add any derivative contract, such as one where he can withdraw all IDerivative.deposit-ed funds. SafEth.adjustWeights allows the owner t...

An attacker can front-run setMaxPayout() and freeze deposit() and the whole protocol from progressing in epochs.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. When the owner calls setMaxPayout to decrease maxPayout to newMaxPayout, an attacker can front-run it and deposit so that termsepoch.payoutTotal newMaxPayout. This will freeze deposit and the whole...

Upgradeability completely breaks decentralization

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Owner of SafEth can steal all staked funds. Proof of Concept SafEth is an upgradeable ERC20 contract that handles the conversion between ETH and whatever derivatives that are implemented. But it also has access to the staked funds through the derivatives...

poolPrice in Reth.sol can overflow and revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact To determine the value of sqrtPriceX96 that will cause an overflow, we need to analyze the calculation in the function: sqrtPriceX96 uintsqrtPriceX96 1e18 96 2 The maximum value for a uint256 is 2^256 - 1. An overflow occurs when the result of the...

WstEth.withdraw() improper implementation of slippage check

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the current implementation of withdraw, the amount is not controlled by minOut. Impact: Users can get rekt. Proof of Concept function withdrawuint256 amount external onlyOwner IWStETHWSTETH.unwrapamount; uint256 stEthBal =...

MuteBond.sol: deposit function reverts if remaining payout is very small due to >0 check in dMute.LockTo function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact I will show in this report how the MuteBond.deposit function can experience a temporary DOS. The attacker or just any other user by mistake or by not knowing about it can receive a payout from the deposit function that puts the payoutTotal of the current...

First stake inflation attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first staker can steal the next staked funds. Proof of Concept As the first one to stake, the attacker stakes minAmount ETH, for which minAmount or slightly less due to slippage SafEth tokens are minted. The attacker immediately unstakes the entire...

deposit function of WstEth not working correctly

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The deposit function doesnt seem to work at all, or correctly at all. Its missing some code, etc. Please see my natspec notes below for more clarity: Apologies, this is 10mins before contest ends, so I'm just going to copy my NatSpec notes here: function...

Reth flashloan attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Using a flashloan to manipulate rETH/ETH price a hacker can receive more SafEth shares for the same amount of ether, thus draining all three derivative contracts rETH, SfrxEth and WstEth. Proof of Concept Reth.poolPrice depends on UniswapV3 pool.slot0...

Burning rETH at the unstake might revert

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Unstaking is blocked. Proof of Concept When unstaking the withdraw of each derivative is called. Reth.withdraw withdraws by calling RocketTokenRETHInterfacerethAddress.burnamount. But RocketTokenRETH.burn reverts if the ETH balance is insufficient for th...

Reth griefing

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The maximum slippage when buying rETH from the Uniswap V3 pool is calculated in Reth derivative contract by taking the current price in the Uniswap V3 pool at runtime, without taking into account the price at which the user sent the transaction to the...

Division before multiplication truncate minOut and incurs heavy precision loss and result in insufficient slippage protection

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When Calcuting the minOut before doing trade, Division before multiplication truncate minOut and incurs heavy precision loss, then very sub-optimal amount of the trade output can result in loss of fund from user because of the insufficient slippage...

Swap deadline for Reth derivative cannot be specified and used for staking

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When calling the following Reth.deposit function, uint256 amountSwapped = swapExactInputSingleHopWETHADDRESS, rethAddress, 500, msg.value, minOut can be executed. Calling the Reth.swapExactInputSingleHop function below then calls...

Users might lose their stETH rebased reward due to the weights change

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability Details Let's consider the following scenario: Bob deposits 10eth with the weights: stETH: weights0 = 90e18, rETH: weights1 = 5e18. sfrxETH: weights2 = 5e18 Now, since the Lido has 80% of liquid staking market, Asymmetry Finance decides to adjust...

Spot UniswapV3 pricing for rETH when staking in SafEth can lead to loss of user funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can craft a set of transactions so that when they are depositing funds in the SafEth contract, using the stake function, they can understate the value of existing deposits preDepositPrice value, while overstating the value of their deposit...

Hardcoded poolFee in deposit() Function Cause Liquidity Depth Issue for Swap

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In deposit function we are using the hardcoded value of poolFee as 500 which limits the ability of liquidity providers to select the appropriate fee tier, potentially reducing the returns for liquidity providers. IWETHWETHADDRESS.depositvalue: msg.value;...

Potential reentrancy in unstake function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact there is a potential reentrancy vulnerability in the unstake function. After the user's safETH tokens are burned, the function sends ETH to the user's address using the call method. If the receiving address is a contract and it has a fallback function th...

REth token price can be manipulated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Currently, all deposit operations split the received ETH between derivatives. One of them is rETH, trading on Pool 0xa4e0faA58465A2D369aa21B3e42d43374c6F9613 with around 1500 ETH in liquidity for each side. The price calculation for splitting deposits in...

the depositor can get sanwich attack when call stake in SafEth and deposit in RETH

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. users who stake eth from call function stake in will get sandwich attack, which users will lose money Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or an...

DOS attack to RedeemTo() and GetUnderlyingTokens(), leading to loss of funds.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. An attacker can launch a DOS attack to RedeemTo and GetUnderlyingTokens so that it will always fail for a particular account, say Bob. In this way, Bob will not be able to redeem the MuteToken locked...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #74 [1679875886032]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 74 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: Exchange Rate can be manipulated if positions are big enough for a long enough time --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #39 [1679850456945]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 39 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: N-05 Fees are not being set in the constructor --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #99 [1679874011180]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 99 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: 02 VaultToken.setVault FUNCTION IS CALLABLE BY ANYONE, AND DEV TEAM'S VaultToken.setVault TRANSACTION CAN BE FRONTRUN BY MALICIOUS ACTOR --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #60 [1679803335439]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 60 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: LiquidityPool.sol: If the fee recipient is not set then all LP operations such as deposits and withdrawals will fail. Consider making fee transfers optional depending on whether a fee recipient and percentage is set -...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #179 [1679871876484]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 179 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-14 Lack of access control in setVault function leave it vulnerable to frontrunning attack --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #215 [1679863647530]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 215 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: NC1 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #83 [1679850055838]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 83 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-05 PauseModifier is not used in KangarooVault --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #83 [1679850012658]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 83 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 There is no way to disapprove a collateral --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #88 [1679874647648]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 88 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-2 Invalid and stale prices from Synthethix are not validated --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #211 [1679804504433]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 211 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-8 VaultToken setVault initialization can be front-runned --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #88 [1679874652791]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 88 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-3 KangarooVault.removeCollateral doesn't remove the collateral from the position --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #60 [1679803414194]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 60 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: LiquidityPool.sol: The deposit queue processing in processDeposits reads the price of the liquidity token only once at the start of the loop so this means that some queued deposits may not incur price slippage dependi...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #229 [1679864317254]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 229 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-05 VaultToken.setVault can be front-run --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #87 [1679862910687]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 87 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Uninitialized variables --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #88 [1679874611177]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 88 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-1 Vault assignment in VaultToken can be frontrunned --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #98 [1679803209669]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 98 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: QA-01 PauseModifier is implemented in the KangarooVault.sol contract but isn't used due to not being apart of core functionality --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #211 [1679800480796]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 211 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-4 LiquidityPool processWithdraws overwrites returnedAmount for withdrawals processed in multiple steps The returnedAmount field in the QueuedWithdraw struct is incorrectly overwritten when the withdraw is processed...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #215 [1679863603573]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 215 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L1 + L2 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #88 [1679874664641]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 88 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-6 Spamming deposit and withdraw queues --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #29 [1679672352018]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 29 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: M-02 Division before multiplication incurs unnecessary precision loss 29 --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #773 [1679568911031]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 773 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: LACK OF SLIPPAGE PROTECTIONS FOR EOA IN FUNCTIONS LIKE ReaperVaultERC4626.deposit, ReaperVaultERC4626.mint, ReaperVaultERC4626.withdraw, AND ReaperVaultERC4626.redeem --- The text was updated successfully, but these...

The users will receive a wrong liquidity token amount because there is an error in the token price calculation in the LiquidityPool::processDeposits() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The processDeposits helps to process the users deposits that were queued in the queueDeposit function. The processDeposits function iterates multiple queued deposits and increases the totalFunds storage variable which is used to the accountability of the...

Attacker can artificially inflate the token price and and gets more profit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can cause the artificial inflation in token price and gets more profit Proof of Concept Let assume the inital values totalFunds = 10000000000 , VAULTTOKEN.totalSupply = 100000000000 , totalQueuedWithdrawals= 1000000 function initiateDepositaddre...

Registering non-emoji domains doesn't work

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When registering a name containing a non-emoji tile, all the tiles are mapped to emoji tiles before registering a name, so the registered name is invalid. This ruins the protocol, the users can't use it to register the desired names unless they are purel...

A Smart Contract can repeatedly call mint, increasing gas costs due to storage

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The functions fuse and mint do not check if the caller is an EOA account. Therefore a smart contract can call fuse over and again Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub...

The KangarooVault liquidity providers receive a wrong vault token amount because an error in the processDepositQueue() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The KangarooVault.sol::processDepositQueue function helps to process the queued deposits. The deposits are queued if the KangarooVault vault doesn't have registered positions. The processDepositQueue function calls the getTokenPrice function to be able t...