Division before multiply results in precision loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Precision loss occurs when division is carried out before multiplication, that can affect gas calculation in terms of publishing the data to L1. Proof of Concept Tools Used Manual Review Recommended Mitigation Steps Recommendation is made for avoiding...

[H-01] User that fuse more tiles to Namespace NFT pay lesser fusing costs instead of greater

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User that fuses more tiles will pay lesser fusing costs to revenueAddress instead of higher cost as intended Proof of Concept Namespace.solL110-L114 /Namespace.sol 110: function fuseCharacterData calldata characterList external 111: uint256 numCharacters...

External calls can be manipulated

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By making external calls to untrusted contracts, the sender might manipulate the contract's state and cause unintended behavior. Proof of Concept In the tokenURI and mint functions, the contract makes external calls to ERC721nftContract.tokenURInftID and...

Wrong block number calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Detailed description of the impact of this finding. The calculation for the block info is currentBlockNumber + 1 BLOCKINFOBLOCKNUMBERPART + newTimestamp. getBlockNumberAndTimestamp, getBlockTimestamp, getBlockNumber all incorrectly calculate the current...

Namespace tokenName has only emojis.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The tokenName and image of Namespace should always be the same. The image is correct but the tokenName only consists of emojis. Duplicate names are checked on the tokenName and not on the image. Because of this a tile of font class 1 with character index...

Unchecked return values in setValueForNextCall

Lines of code Vulnerability details Title: Description: When creating a contract, if there is value to be transferred the constructContract function of ContractDeployer will use the SystemContractsHelper.setValueForNextFarCall Method: However in constructContract function doesn't verify that the...

Unchecked return value of call will allow to send messages marked as sent but will fail due to not enough gas

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact On the sendTol1 function, they are sending the message via the SystemContractHelper: SystemContractHelper.toL1true, bytes32uint256uint160msg.sender, hash; the problem relies on the fact that they are not checking whether the message was actually sent...

The price fee for fusion characters is incorrect.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Price fee for fusion characters is incorrect. According to the docs Fusing To fuse a namespace NFT, the user specifies the trays and the tiles offsets within the trays to use. Note that the whole tray is always burned, even if you only use...

User can fuse an NFT with minimal cost

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User can fuse an NFT with minimal cost Proof of Concept The fuse is used to fuse a new Namespace NFT with the referenced tiles,if it is called, the protocol will transfer fusing costs from msg.sender to revenue address. The fusing costs is calculated...

Adding Multiple Blocks with the Same Timestamp Can Create Ambiguity in the Order of Blocks in the Blockchain Network

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Multiple blocks at the same timestamp creates ambiguity about the order in which these blocks should be added to the chain. This can cause inconsistencies in the state of the network and make it vulnerable to attacks such as double-spending. Proof of...

Missing check for NFT contract, a bad actor can mint a PFP NFT without having a CID NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Missing check for NFT contract, a bad actor can mint a PFP NFT without having a CID NFT. Proof of Concept The ProfilePicture.mint is used to mint a new PFP NFT. function mintaddress nftContract, uint256 nftID external uint256 tokenId = ++numMinted; if...

Reentrancy in ProfilePicture.mint()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Reentrancy in ProfilePicture.mint Proof of Concept The protocol allows user to mint a PFP NFT. Inside the mint function ,there is a check that ERC721nftContract.ownerOfnftID != msg.sender, as the code below the nftContract and nftID is specified by the...

Attacker could potentially burn the token balance of totalSupply and L2EthContract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker potentially can burn all L2EthContract and totalSupply tokens Proof of Concept function withdrawaddress l1Receiver external payable override uint256 amount = msg.value; // Silent burning of the ether unchecked balanceaddressthis -= amount;...

Sending L2 ---> L1 message without paying gas for published data due to uint256 overflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to this bug, a user can send arbitrarily long messages greater than a certain length from L2 to L1 without paying for the gas that is required for publishing data on L1. Proof of Concept Below is a PoC contract called "Test" that illustrates the bug...

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...

The Risk of Adding an Incorrect Previous Block Hash Value in a Blockchain Network

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact There is a risk of adding an incorrect previous block hash value to a block, either intentionally or unintentionally. If the previous block hash value is incorrect, it means that the data in the previous block has been tampered with, and the current bloc...

Users can fuse an NFT without burning a tray NFT

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users can fuse an NFT without burning a tray NFT Proof of Concept The Namespace protocol allows user to fuse a new Namespace NFT with the referenced tiles. Inside the fuse function, the protocol first transfer fusing costs from msg.sender to revenue...

_l1Receiver may lose the token amount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact l1Receiver lose the token amount Proof of Concept function withdrawaddress l1Receiver external payable override uint256 amount = msg.value; // Silent burning of the ether unchecked balanceaddressthis -= amount; totalSupply -= amount; // Send the L2 log, ...

Operator can cause funds to be stolen by manipulating gas fee refund

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An operator can manipulate the refund of gas fee mechanism to steal from the bootloader balance. Inside refundCurrentL2Transaction function in the bootloader where the refund is happening for the refund recipient at L1097, the operator provides a value f...

An attacker can manipulate the call stack of the transaction to impersonate another address and set a different value for the origin variable.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By changing the transaction's call stack, an attacker can use the origin variable to pretend to be another address, as a result, the attacker can be able to enter the system without authorization and carry out evil deeds. Proof of Concept The vulnerabili...

Bytecode Compressor Contract Replay Attack.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Injection of duplicate code. Proof of Concept In the markBytecodeAsPublished function, the contract does not check whether a particular hash has already been added to the storage. The contract only checks the current marker value of the hash, which is se...

getBlockHashEVM() function vulnerability leads to DoS attack

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact By using the getBlockHashEVM function with erroneous input, an attacker can take advantage of this vulnerability to deprive the contract of gas and launch a denial of service DoS attack against the network, contracts and valid transactions will therefore...

Reentrancy in validateTransaction function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract can be called by an attacker several times until the money are depleted. The contract owner may suffer financial damages as a result of this vulnerability. Description The validateTransaction function in line 66-71 accepts external calls and...

Upgraded Q -> 3 from #197 [1678982150949]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 197 as 3 risk. The relevant finding follows: L-02 Instant reward calculation --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Attacker can abuse rounding down to get reward without depositing anything in LP pool

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In function withdrawLP, it calculates the amount of points from the amount input parameter. unchecked uint256 points = amount 100 / 1e18 lpPosition.multiplier / DIVISOR; // Update the caller's LP token stake. lpPosition.amount -= amount; lpPosition.point...

Lack of a contract existence check may lead to undesired behavior

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The functions NeoTokyoStaker.assetTransferFrom and NeoTokyoStaker.assetTransfer are both used as helper functions to perform low level calls, both functions revert if the low-level call fails, but no checks are made if the contract that's being called...

LP tokens without 18 decimals are not supported

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If the LP token used does not have 18 decimals, staking rewards for LP tokens will be much more or much less than intended. Vulnerability Details In stakeLP and withdrawLP, the formulas for calculating points are as shown: NeoTokyoStaker.solL1155 uint256...

Some Amount of tokens will be left behind in BYTES 1.0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If user wants to upgrade all its token he won't be able to do that. Proof of Concept Let's see what is happening function upgradeBytes uint256 amount external if IERC20BYTES1.balanceOfmsg.sender amount revert DoNotHaveEnoughOldBytesamount; During the...

ZERO TRUNCATION COULD LEAD TO UNEXPECTED RESULTS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Precision issue leading to zero truncation due to numerator smaller than denominator in a ratio or a division happens readily in Solidity if extra cares have not been given to it. Arithmetic operations running into this incident are typically associated...

Huge over calculating user rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Huge over calculating user rewards When user claim rewards for the first time rewards over calculated Proof of Concept getPoolReward function uses ''uint256 timeSinceReward = block.timestamp - lastRewardTime'' formula to calculate period of time that...

User can cause the points of their LP stake position to underflow

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact This vulnerability allows a user to cause their LP position points to underflow which will then allow a user to receive a massively disproportionate amount of the emission rewards relative to their stake because they now practically have an infinite amou...

Rewards calculation is unfair and leads to stakers losing rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details User rewards are updated upon staking actions ie stake or withdraw: File: contracts/staking/NeoTokyoStaker.sol 1225: // Grant the caller their total rewards with each staking action. 1226: IByteContractBYTES.getRewardmsg.sender; Which are computed as follows:...

Updating a pool's total points doesn't affect existing stake positions for rewards calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Staking rewards are calculated based on the user's share of total points in the corresponding asset pool, this is the sum of the points associated to the staker's positions divided by the total points from all positions in the pool. We can see this...

Executing getCreditYield(citizenId, citizenVaultId) in NeoTokyoStaker._stakeS1Citizen function can cause identityPoints to be lower than it should be when corresponding S1 Citizen to be staked does not have a component vault but an optional vault is provided

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Calling the following NeoTokyoStaker.stakeS1Citizen function executes string memory citizenCreditYield = getCreditYieldcitizenId, citizenVaultId and uint256 identityPoints = identityCreditPointscitizenCreditYield. When the S1 Citizen to be staked does no...

Use the _assetTransferFrom function instead of _assetTransfer. This is because the tokens are held in the escrow contract, rather than being in the destination BYTES address, and thus require a transfer from the escrow contract to the recipient's address

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The msg.sender lose his stakedBytes From BYTES address not possible to send stakedBytes to msg.sender. The stakedBytes only help in escrow contract not in BYTES address. Proof of Concept function assetTransfer address asset, address to, uint256 amount...

Staker can withdraw a staked LP token amount that is small enough to ensure that lpPosition.points does not change when calling NeoTokyoStaker._withdrawLP function and cause extra reward shares, which the staker is not entitled to, to be minted to the staker when calling lpPosition.getPoolReward function later

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When withdrawing the staked LP tokens, the staker can divide the total staked token amount into smaller amounts and call the NeoTokyoStaker.withdraw function, which further calls the following NeoTokyoStaker.withdrawLP function, to withdraw each of such...

Possible loss of rewards when staking non-component vaults

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users could gain less rewards if they stake a non-component vault, as compared to reassembling their S1 Citizen with the vault and and staking it as a component vault. Vulnerability Details From the repository's README.md: S1 Citizens without a component...

Total reward is miscalculating

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the getPoolReward the calcul of totalReward is wrong because the rewardRate is not updated. When block.timestamp is less or equal to windows.startTime the reward rate should equal to the current window rate not the previous one. Proof of Concept...

Users cant stake into S1 or S2 Citizen if they dont have a timelockEndTime

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact function stakeBytes if citizenStatus.timelockEndTime == 0 revert CannotStakeIntoUnownedCitizencitizenId, seasonId; A user will not be able to successfully stake their Bytes into a Season 1 or Season 2 Citizen if they do not have a timelockEndTime set. Th...

# configureLP function should check LP stakers present before changing LP address.

Lines of code Vulnerability details configureLP function should check LP stakers existence before changing LP address. Permitted users are allowed to change LP address when lpLocked is false. So this does not follow the comments above. Proof of concept 1701 This function allows a permitted user t...

Newly staked LP tokens' end time can overwrite previously staked LP tokens' end time

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When the following NeoTokyoStaker.stakeLP function is called for the first time to stake some LP tokens, stakerLPPositionmsg.sender.timelockEndTime = block.timestamp + timelockDuration is executed. Then, calling this function for a second time to stake...

wrong updating lp position

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact lock lp token at staking more than required when user adds some lp token staking amount, contract uses new timelockEndTime for previously staked amount . Proof of Concept Scenario : user have some amount of lp token staked for a period of time like 30 da...

BYTES can be used to increase points by staking them immediately before withdrawing them

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When staking BYTES, users don't need to lock them for any specific time. BYTES are locked in a Citizen, and they are withdrawn together with the Citizen. Users can stake all the BYTES they own before withdrawing the citizen, increasing their points in th...

User Rewards will be lost in case of Withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact User loses his unclaimed rewards If user withdraw all of his staked tokens he won't be able to claim rewards Proof of Concept the point is used to calculate user rewards and when a user withdraw all of its staked tokens the point will be set to zero and...

Malicious users can claim BYTES rewards after withdrawing all of their LP stake

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Users are able to continue claiming BYTES rewards indefinitely on their initials points after withdrawing all of their LP stake. Proof of Concept A user can withdraw all of their LP staked tokens in multiple steps with an amount 1e16. If the amount is...

share underflow in getPoolReward()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact It is important to draw attention to an issue that, while out of scope, can lead to a complete loss of funds on the contract and, therefore, seems significant. The configurePools function allows setting an arbitrary, unrestricted daoTax, which can result...

Flawed calculation in getPoolReward leads to permanent loss of rewards

Lines of code Vulnerability details In NeoTokyoStaker.getPoolReward, a users reward is calculated as follows: 1388: uint256 share = points PRECISION / pool.totalPoints totalReward; 1390: share /= PRECISION; points represents the users total points in the pool over a specific potentially long time...

Ability to receive LP rewards without having any LP staked

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The impact of this is high as a user is able to first stake LP tokens, then craftily withdraw them in specific increments without any change to their staking rewards. The user is able to get to a state in which they have 0 LP tokens staked, but have 0 LP...

upgradeBytes() functon doesn't allows user to upgrade their entire bytes1 token to bytes2 token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The users can't upgrade all of its bytes1 token to bytes due to logic error in upgradeBytes functon. The user can only upgrade the token if he choose the less amount then what they already have. They cannot upgrade all tokens. Proof of Concept The...

NeoTokyoStaker.getPoolReward function can be frontrun, which can cause staker and DAO to lose reward shares that they are entitled to

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When calling the following NeoTokyoStaker.stakeBytes and NeoTokyoStaker.stakeLP functions, the higher the specified amount to be staked is, the higher the pool.totalPoints is increased by. function stakeBytes uint256 private uint256 amount; uint256...