Custom Ether Address Representation in Shell Protocol's Constructor

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The hardcoded custom representation of Ether in the Shell Protocol's adapter for the Curve Tricrypto pool using address0x4574686572, deviates from standard Ethereum practices and introduces the risk of address collisions. This could potentially lead to...

Incorrect indexing in constructor of Curve Adapters causes both contracts to assume xToken and lpToken to be the same token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Curve Adapter contracts are unusable, as the protocol won't be able to tell the difference between which token USDC/USDT or lpToken is intended on being used for the transaction. Vulnerability details In the constructors of the Curve2PoolAdapter.sol and...

Handling Potential Slippage Due to Truncation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The potential slippage issue arises from the precision loss during decimal conversion in the primitiveOutputAmount function. When interacting with the Curve Tricrypto Pool, especially involving tokens with different decimal precisions, truncation can lea...

Batch Execution Failure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A failure in one interaction could potentially cause the entire batch to fail, affecting subsequent interactions. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates...

Incorrect Condition for Validating Input and Output Tokens in CurveTricryptoAdapter::_determineComputeType Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The contract contains a bug in the determineComputeType function, where the condition for checking if the input and output tokens are valid for swapping is incorrect. This bug may lead to unexpected behavior and incorrect computation of the compute type...

owner can brick unwrapping by setting unwrap devisor = 0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The protocol does not handle when Ocean.changeUnwrapFee sets unwrapFeeDivisor = 0 gracefully. When setting unwrapFeeDevisor = 0, the function Ocean.calculateUnwrapFee will revert due to a division by 0. This function is used in the callstacks related to:...

Potential Gas and Overflow Issues with Decimal Shift Left in _convertDecimals Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The exponentiation operation in the decimal shift left scenario can lead to high gas consumption and potential integer overflow. The gas cost and risk of overflow increase with the value of the exponent, which could make the function expensive or even...

Unverified Primitives

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Interacting with unverified or malicious Ocean primitives could result in loss of funds or incorrect computations. Proof of Concept Provide direct links to all referenced code in GitHub. Add screenshots, logs, or any other relevant proof that illustrates...

Unbounded Approval

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The adapter may approve an unlimited amount of tokens to be spent by the Ocean protocol and the Curve pool, which could be risky if those contracts are compromised. Proof of Concept The adapter may approve an unlimited amount of tokens to be spent by the...

Lack of Slippage Protection in CurveTricryptoAdapter::primitiveOutputAmount and Curve2PoolAdapter::primitiveOutputAmount

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Due to the lack of slippage protection in the CurveTricryptoAdapter::primitiveOutputAmountand Curve2PoolAdapter::primitiveOutputAmount, user deposits and withdrawals are vulnerable to being sandwich attacked. Proof of Concept...

High risk in integrating Ocean with Curve TriCrypto pool on Arbitrum

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The Curve TriCrypto adapter contract enables swapping, adding liquidity, and removing liquidity for the USDT-WBTC-ETH pool on Arbitrum. However, this pool has been flagged for potential exploit risks. Curve Finance issued a warning: This pool might be at...

Limited functionality due to Primitive's balance being decreased before it is called

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the current implementation, the balance of a primitive is decreased burned before it is called. This requires the primitive to hold outputAmount of outputToken before a transaction, which severely restricts the functionality it can provide and has no...

Reentrancy issue. User can easily mint more than allowed presale, bypassing merkle root limit

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Lack of reentrancy protection and code not follow Checks, Effects, Interactions pattern guideline. Here are the Effects stuff happen after Interactions affected by reentrancy: tokensMintedAllowlistAddress: tracking presale minted NFT per address...

Division by Zero and Precision Loss in computeOutputAmount Function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The vulnerability can cause a runtime exception due to division by zero, leading to contract execution reverting. Additionally, precision loss may occur in calculations due to truncation of remainders, Proof of Concept When unwrapFeeDivisor unexpectedly...

Insecure and Inflexible Forwarder Approval Mechanism (Full Access Grant)

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The current implementation of the onlyApprovedForwarder modifier in the Ocean smart contract has several negative impacts: 1. Security Risk: Users are exposed to a significant security risk if their forwarder is compromised. An attacker can exploit full...

Users can fail to unstake and lose their deserved ETH because malfunctioning or untrusted derivative cannot be removed. Users can fail to unstake and lose their deserved ETH because malfunctioning or untrusted derivative cannot be removed.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Potest egreditur posses torrens fugamque ignavis Ubi spectemur patent prominet tenebat ait est Lorem markdownum vitam, unus cum quaeque bellique portante et siccis intremuere nondum pascere vidit. In mihi cara terra, sui regni meritasque nescia, litora vocatum...

An attacker can manipulate the preDepositvePrice to steal from other users.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact The first user that stakes can manipulate the total supply of sfTokens and by doing so create a rounding error for each subsequent user. In the worst case, an attacker can steal all the funds of the next user. Proof of Concept When the first user enters...

Some functions that call Exchange.getMarkPrice function do not check if Exchange.getMarkPrice function's returned markPrice is 0

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Impact The following Exchange.getMarkPrice function uses pool.baseAssetPrice's returned baseAssetPrice, which is spotPrice returned by perpMarket.assetPrice, to calculate and return the markPrice. When such spotPrice is 0, this function...

Calls to get_virtual_price() are vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

Lines of code 117 Vulnerability details getvirtualprice was originally considered to be a manipulation-resistant price - suitable as a price oracle, but it was later found to be vulnerable to a read-only reentrancy attack, where the Curve contract could be put into a partially-modified state, and...

Array is push()ed but not pop()ed, and is iterated over

Lines of code 96, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/ta...

latestAnswer() may return stale values

Lines of code 121, 122, 123, 124, 51 Vulnerability details latestAnswer only returns the latest answer or zero, and thus there is no way to tell whether the value is stale or not. Use latestRoundData instead, and check whether the latest timestamp is within your protocol's limits. File:...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...

_safeMint() should be used rather than _mint() wherever possible

Lines of code 139, 178, 204 Vulnerability details mint is discouraged in favor of safeMint which ensures that the recipient is either an EOA or implements IERC721Receiver. Both OpenZeppelin and solmate have versions of this function. In the cases below, mint does not call...

Array is push()ed but not pop()ed, and is iterated over

Lines of code 96, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/ta...

_safeMint() should be used rather than _mint() wherever possible

Lines of code 139, 178, 204 Vulnerability details mint is discouraged in favor of safeMint which ensures that the recipient is either an EOA or implements IERC721Receiver. Both OpenZeppelin and solmate have versions of this function. In the cases below, mint does not call...

Excess funds sent via msg.value not refunded

Lines of code 201 Vulnerability details The code below allows the caller to provide Ether, but does not refund the amount in excess of what's required, leaving funds stranded in the contract. The condition should be changed to check for equality, or the code should refund the excess. File:...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having to...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a fee-on-transfer...

latestAnswer() may return stale values

Lines of code 121, 122, 123, 124, 51 Vulnerability details latestAnswer only returns the latest answer or zero, and thus there is no way to tell whether the value is stale or not. Use latestRoundData instead, and check whether the latest timestamp is within your protocol's limits. File:...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #776 [1701456793936]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 776 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Low-01 No minimum AmountrsETH receive parameter absent in depositAsset Here we can see that User deposit asset via depositAsset which take asset address and asset depositAmount as parameter Then rsethAmountMinted...

Upgraded Q -> 2 from #776 [1701452999417]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 776 as 2 risk. The relevant finding follows: Low-01 No minimum AmountrsETH receive parameter absent in depositAsset Here we can see that User deposit asset via depositAsset which take asset address and asset depositAmount as parameter Then rsethAmountMinted...

Calls to get_virtual_price() are vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

Lines of code 117 Vulnerability details getvirtualprice was originally considered to be a manipulation-resistant price - suitable as a price oracle, but it was later found to be vulnerable to a read-only reentrancy attack, where the Curve contract could be put into a partially-modified state, and...

Excess funds sent via msg.value not refunded

Lines of code 201 Vulnerability details Impact The code below allows the caller to provide Ether, but does not refund the amount in excess of what's required, leaving funds stranded in the contract. The condition should be changed to check for equality, or the code should refund the excess. File:...

Return values of transfer()/transferFrom() not checked

Lines of code 377, 509, 491, 530, 42, 50 Vulnerability details Impact Not all IERC20 implementations revert when there's a failure in transfer/transferFrom. The function signature has a boolean return value and they indicate errors that way instead. By not checking the return value, operations th...

Unsafe usage of msg.value in a loop

Lines of code 140 Vulnerability details Impact The value of msg.value in a transaction's call never gets updated, even if the called contract ends up sending some or all of the Eth to another contract. This means that using msg.value in a for- or while-loop, without extra accounting logic, will...

latestAnswer() may return stale values

Lines of code 121, 122, 123, 124, 51 Vulnerability details Impact latestAnswer only returns the latest answer or zero, and thus there is no way to tell whether the value is stale or not. Use latestRoundData instead, and check whether the latest timestamp is within your protocol's limits. File:...

_safeMint() should be used rather than _mint() wherever possible

Lines of code 139, 178, 204 Vulnerability details Impact mint is discouraged in favor of safeMint which ensures that the recipient is either an EOA or implements IERC721Receiver. Both OpenZeppelin and solmate have versions of this function. In the cases below, mint does not call...

addRewardToken() does note remove old entries before adding new ones

Lines of code 455, 280, 378, 411 Vulnerability details Impact Each time addRewardToken is called, new entries are added to the array, but doing so does not remove any old entries. By calling the function multiple times, an attacker can can increase their voting power indefinitely, without having ...

Contracts are vulnerable to fee-on-transfer accounting-related issues

Lines of code 359, 448, 509, 530, 42, 797, 162 Vulnerability details Impact The functions below transfer funds from the caller to the receiver via transferFrom, but do not ensure that the actual number of tokens received is the same as the input amount to the transfer. If the token is a...

Unsafe use of transfer()/transferFrom() with IERC20

Lines of code 377, 509, 491, 530, 42, 50 Vulnerability details Impact Some tokens do not implement the ERC20 standard properly but are still accepted by most code that accepts ERC20 tokens. For example Tether USDT's transfer and transferFrom functions on L1 do not return booleans as the...

Interface improperly implemented

Lines of code 34, 34, 34, 34, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 38https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapioca-yieldbox-strategies-audi...

Some tokens may revert when zero value transfers are made

Lines of code 356, 371, 145, 272, 252, 116, 445, 374, 506, 488https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tap-token-audit/blob/59749be5bc2286f0bdbf59d7ddc258ddafd49a9f/contracts/options/TapiocaOptionBroker...

Return values of approve() not checked

Lines of code 321, 215, 184, 450, 761, 217, 157, 234, 339, 386https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/t...

Array is push()ed but not pop()ed, and is iterated over

Lines of code 96, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485, 485https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/ta...

Unchecked return value of low-level call()/delegatecall()

Lines of code 120, 141, 411, 184, 160, 189, 152, 444, 625, 638https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/tapioca-bar-audit/blob/2286f80f928f41c8bc189d0657d74ba83286c668/contract...

Using block.timestamp as the deadline/expiry invites MEV

Lines of code 307 Vulnerability details Impact Passing block.timestamp as the expiry/deadline of an operation does not mean "require immediate execution" - it means "whatever block this transaction appears in, I'm comfortable with that block's timestamp". Providing this value means that a malicio...

Fee-on-transfer/rebasing tokens will have problems when swapping

Lines of code 110 Vulnerability details Impact Uniswap v3 does not support rebasing or fee-on-transfer tokens so using these tokens with it will result funds getting stuck. With fee-on-transfer tokens, if the balance isn't checked, the wrong amount may be transferred out. With rebasing tokens, th...

Title of issue/finding

Lines of code , Vulnerability details Impact description for the issue found Content includes @Audit stack and code example of the issue Content includes @Audit stack and code example of the issue Assessed type other --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All...

Unsafe use of approve() with IERC20

Lines of code 321, 215, 184, 450, 761, 217, 157, 234, 339, 386https://github.com/Tapioca-DAO/t...

Use of transferFrom() rather than safeTransferFrom() for NFTs in will lead to the loss of NFTs

Lines of code 230, 342, 514, 536 Vulnerability details Impact The EIP-721 standard says the following about transferFrom: /// @notice Transfer ownership of an NFT -- THE CALLER IS RESPONSIBLE /// TO CONFIRM THAT to IS CAPABLE OF RECEIVING NFTS OR ELSE /// THEY MAY BE PERMANENTLY LOST /// @dev...