Filling all auction slots to win the auction

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description The number of bids for one auction is limited to 1000. It means that someone may make all 1000 bids and thus invalidate all other bids. Therefore, a malicious user can win the auction with the minimum possible bid. It may seem...

msg.sender token balance is not checked before calling safeTransferFrom function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact createAuction FUNCTION and bid FUNCTION: Without checking the msg.sender token balance the transfer function may be failed to transfer token from msg.sender to contract address . this may cause a transactions failures. Same instance in 2 times PROOF OF...

A total of 3 risks: one with imperfect concurrency judgment logic, one with unrobust business logic, and one with unreasonable timestamp settings

Lines of code Vulnerability details RISK 1: When creating an auction, if the exact same token is transferred to the contract in a very short period of time, it will cause one of the auctions to fail to be created. is caused by the following statement: if balanceAfterTransfer - balanceBeforeTransf...

Rebasing tokens as Base tokens for the auction could be stuck in the contract or mean loss of funds for the las person to withdraw

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Use of rebasing tokens is not checked and could result it stuck funds, inability to cancel an Auction or withdraw due amounts of base token for the last one to call withdraw Proof of Concept If a rebasing token is used for the base token the balance held...

Unsafe cast blocks withdraw of tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Unsafe cast blocks withdraw of tokens Impact tokensAvailableAtTime is a internal function used by tokensAvailableForWithdrawal and this one being used internally also externally as it is public by withdraw method. cliffAmount is a uint256, being able to have mu...

Attacker can take all the winnings and fill up the bids and cause loss of funds or dos

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Attacker can fill up all the bids and steal and be the winner and cause a dos and then withdraw/refund the funds since when doing a refund the bid isn't taken off the array an attacker can make 1000 bids and cause dos and have 100 percent chance of winni...

Solmate's SafeTransferLib won't check if token has code, which can affect transfers in SizeSealed

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Not checking for token existence is a know issue for Solmate. This can cause unexpected contract functionality for transfers implemented in SizeSealed. Note that this might not be a problem for baseToken due to the check implemented in L103. However, thi...

quoteToken could be fee-on-transfer token

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens could have fees for each transfer, they are known as "fee-on-transfer" tokens. While there is a check inside createAuction function that prevents these tokens from being baseToken, FoT tokens still allowed to be quoteToken which could...

Multi Step upgrades introduce security risk

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If Governor upgrades the system using executeDiamondCutProposal function then freezing is removed. This could be a problem where Governor was still not ready to make freezable facet available as shown in POC Proof of Concept 1. Governor discovers a...

seller can change lowestBaseand lowestQuote and the seller can make it diffrent values causing a dos or loss of funds

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact When I a seller finalizes the auction they change the lowestQuote and lowestBase.When users withdraw from the auction after the auction is finalized. QuoteBought is calculated with the new amounts which can cause dos or refund their leftover quote amount...

Any use of fee-on-transfer tokens as quote tokens in auctions will result in freeze or loss of funds for users.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description SIZE auctions do not support fee-on-transfer tokens. The platform rejects taxed baseToken during createAuction: // Passes https://github.com/transmissions11/solmate/blob/main/src/utils/SafeTransferLib.solL9 // Transfer base tokens to auction contrac...

Cancel auction does not get deleted leading to loss of quoteTokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A malicious seller can cancel the auction just after it has ended, receive their baseToken back and then call reveal to make bidders lose their tokens which is sent to address0. Since a.data.lowestQuote == typeuint128.max just before reveal call is made,...

[PNM-002] finalize with malicious input may lock bidder funds in the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The finalize function of the contract SizeSealed is used to finalize an auction, allowing the auctioner or seller to be paid quote tokens and also eventually allowing successful bidders to withdraw base tokens. Once the finalize function is called,...

Some cases maybe cause the bids unable to get their funds back.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All of the following there cases maybe cause the bids unable to get their funds back. Details case1: If sellerwho is a bad man does not reveal in the reveal period, then all the bids will be unable to get their funds back. case2: If sellerwho is a bad ma...

Denial of service when baseAmount is equal to zero

Lines of code Vulnerability details Vulnerability details Description There is a finalize function in the SizeSealed smart contract. The function traverses the array of the bids sorted by price descending. On each iteration, it calculates the quotePerBase. When this variable is calculated, the...

Seller can steal all the bid fund by repeatedly calling finalize()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Bidders' fund will be stolen by malicious seller, they can not get refund. Proof of Concept In finalize, FinalizeData memory data is local, which means in each call, data is re-initialized. By calling finalize multiple times, a malicious seller can get t...

Bidder can steal all the base token by repeatedly calling finalize()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All the base token will be stolen by malicious bidder, even worse the bidder might pay nothing at the end. Proof of Concept Anyone can call finalize, and it can be called multiple times. FinalizeData memory data is local, which means in each call, data i...

Quotetoken can be address(0) or any EOA and still allow auctions and bids to be created

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact createAuction in SizeSealed.sol performs no validation of the auction parameters AuctionParameters sent to it and will allow a Seller to create an auction with an ERC20 quoteToken of address0 putting at risk the baseToken that has real value. In addition...

Solmate safetransfer and safetransferfrom doesnot check the codesize of the token address, which may lead to fund loss

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In bid function, the safetransferfrom function doesn't check the existence of code at the token address. This is a known issue while using solmate's libraries. Hence this may lead to miscalculation of funds and may lead to loss of funds , because if...

Funds can be stolen

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact For L2, any deposit finalization should come from L1 bridge address. Now the MailBox contract is currently helping to simulate such calls to be coming from L1. The problem is if within zkSync ecosystem, a contract is deployed with address same as L1 brid...

Seller can game the bidIndices[] in finalize()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact High bidders will be taken advantage of by malicious seller. It is likely that the high bidders will place bids above the market price, then the seller can effectively steal the price difference from them. And the other bidders are grieved, wasting time...

Lack of notice period for critical operations

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact All user assets can be locked or stolen. Proof of Concept All user assets can be locked or stolen if the L1ERC20Bridge or L1EthBridge is upgraded to a malicious contract. All user assets can be locked or stolen if governor is lost and...

VARIABLE BALANCE TOKEN ASSOCIATED WITH LOSS AND LOCKING OF FUNDS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ERC20 tokens that are either deflationary or re-basing down could have their respective balance change. The balance could become insufficient at the time of withdraw, refund or cancel to the bidders whose funds will be locked due to DOS. The way to take...

[PNM-003] finalize can be called by bidders, allows them to cancelBid

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description The finalize function is used to finalize the auction, locking all bids, and paying the seller. However, any user, including bidders can call finalize, as it is a public function, and there are no user checks. This may allow bidders to input malicio...

Denial of service from malicious bidder by filling up the bid index up until 1000

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Denial of service from malicious bidder by filling up the bid index up until 1000 Proof of Concept Initially inside bid function there is a check condition if bidIndex = 1000 then it will revert, so this will limit the size of bid created by bidder to...

Solmate's safeTransfer function does not check the existence of the contract

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Miscalculation of transferred funds and finally, loss of funds Proof of Concept Solmate's safeTransfer and safeTransferFrom functions do not check the ext code size of the address of the recipient and so, it may lead to a miscalculation of funds as it...

Casting to uint128 when valiue can exceed uint128.max

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In CommonTokenMath.tokensAvailableAtTime the result is cast to uint128 on line 62. Given that baseAmount close or at it's uint128.max, and cliffPercent is close or at it's max of 1e18 dictated on line 72 in SizeSealed.sol, cliffAmount can reach uint128.m...

Contracts will not working correctly after February 2106. Vesting will be locked forever if withdrawn after February 2106.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Contracts will not working correctly after February 2106. Migration takes costs and is risky. You shouldn't pass on this work to future programmers. You should fix it in the first place. In case anything went wrong during migration, a big fund loss will...

A bidder can buy baseToken with low price by exploiting the DOS prevention measure

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In order to prevent DOS attacks, the smart contract introduces a measure that limits the number of bids on an auction SizeSealed.solL157-L159. However, an attacker/bidder can exploit this measure to block others to place bids so that the attacker can buy...

Wrong bidIndex calculation

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Return wrong bidIndex Proof of Concept SizeSealed.sol Tools Used Manual Recommended Mitigation Steps uint256 bidIndex = a.bids.length - 1 ; --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: 👎 1 trust1995 reacted with thumbs down...

Attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact An attacker can drain the SizeSealed.sol contract buy creating fake auction and manipulating some contract logic. POC Assuming that the SizeSealed.sol initially contains 10000 DAI tokens, I’ll demonstrate how an attacker can steal these tokens. The bug i...

Draining baseToken from contract by calling finalize function multiple times

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Draining baseToken from SizeSealed contract by calling finalize function multiple times Proof of Concept The finalize function can be called multiple times by providing clearingQuote to typeuint128.max. Currently inside finalize function there is no chec...

Malicious seller can steal from bidders.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact A seller can cancel the auction after finalize and thus can steal money from the bidders and get their original baseToken back. POC When an auction is started the value of a.data.lowestQuote is set as typeuint128.max here . In the atState function this...

Return value of ecMul() not checked in encryptMessage()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact ecMul returns 1,1 if failed or with invalid parameters. But encryptMessage does not check for the return value of ecMul. If there is mistake of the private key or public key, the encrypted message will be useless and potentially fail the auction. Proof o...

Auction can be DoS-ed with too many bids

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept The bid functionality pushes every new bid to the a.bids array. On finalize this array is looped over. Now, if there are too many bids in it, the for loop gas consumption will go over the block gas limit, which is 30M gas units currently. The...

Front-running of bid calls

Lines of code Vulnerability details Description There is bid function in the SizeSealed contract. The function accepts the auctionId, which does not contain any information about the auction itself. As a result, transactions of users can be front-runned to enforce them bid for the auction with th...

Protocol won’t work with rebasing tokens

Lines of code Vulnerability details Proof of Concept Some tokens may make arbitrary balance modifications outside of transfers e.g. Ampleforth style rebasing tokens, Compound style airdrops of governance tokens, mintable / burnable tokens. If such a token as used, since in the protocol we cache t...

Reentrancy in createAuction() function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Some ERC20 tokens missing return values and don't fail in case of an unsuccessful transfer. Also, ERC777 tokens could call the tokens receivers during the transfer. If baseToken would be such a token that combines both properties - this could lead to a...

Same function

Lines of code Vulnerability details Both functions do the same thing, while logically one of the functions should be for layer one and the other function should be in layer two to perform the same operation. --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Asymmetric level of transaction validation between L1 side and L2.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact May have double counting of deposits? Proof of Concept On L1 side, there are validations that ensure funds don't get lost nor double counted. For example, finalizeWithdrawal may be called multiple times by allowed callers in case previous calls fail...

No incentive mechanism for allowed senders to call finalizeWithdrawal on behalf of withdrawers.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Since finalizeWithdrawal is a permissioned function, if there are no mechanism in place for allowed senders to trigger it, withdrawers would not able to receive their funds in a timely fashion. Proof of Concept The withdrawal functions such...

ergs price problem

Lines of code Vulnerability details No mechanism has been defined for " l2TransactionBaseCost" function. On the other hand, any Oracle is not used in the whole project to get the price of gas, so this whole project will suffer in coordinating between the price of “ergs” in ZK layer and the real a...

Upgraded Q -> M from 133 [1667781432368]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 133 as Medium risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

Cross-chain replay attacks are possible with create2()

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Mistakes made on one chain can be re-applied to a new chain There is no chain.id in the create2 function data If a user does create2 using the wrong network, an attacker can replay the action on the correct chain, and steal the funds a-la the wintermute...

Upgraded Q -> H from 486 [1667781140997]

Judge has assessed an item in Issue 486 as High risk. The relevant finding follows: --- The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: All reactions...

[Tomo-H1] All funds can drain if some conditions matched

Lines of code Vulnerability details function finalizeWithdrawal uint256 l2BlockNumber, uint256 l2MessageIndex, uint16 l2TxNumberInBlock, bytes calldata message, bytes32 calldata merkleProof external nonReentrant senderCanCallFunctionallowList...

Aliasing L1 sender on L2

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a contract on L1 has the same address as a contract on L2 but doesn't have the same code, we will have a critical issue, as funds will be lost. Proof of Concept Both Optimism and Arbitrum implements applyL1ToL2Alias / undoL1ToL2Alias logic to prevent ...

L2ETHBridge.l2TokenAddress returns CONVENTIONAL_ETH_ADDRESS instead of ETH_TOKEN_SYSTEM_CONTRACT_ADDRESS

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact In the L2ETHBridge contract, both the withdraw and l2TokenAddress functions use CONVENTIONALETHADDRESS as the address of the L2ETH. However, L2ETH is actually an L2StandardToken contract at the ETHTOKENSYSTEMCONTRACTADDRESS address. If the user wants to...

Add chainId to address creation.

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact Although it may not be in the plan to deploy multiple zkSync rollups, it makes sense to include chainid in computeCreate2Address from the very start. It would be more EIP-155 compliant, and will prevent future replay attacks, where a tx of first zkSync...

Bridge should not allow ERC20 tokens with double-entry point

Lines of code Vulnerability details Impact If a token with double-entry point is escrowed in L1 bridge, the user could withdraw their token through the other entry point, thus rugpulling the bridge. And when they actually withdraw from L2, they will take other users' funds from the bridge. Proof ...