Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

The Vault contract and the modules contracts should not receive ETH #546

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Jul 14, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed
Labels
bug Warden finding duplicate Another warden found this issue QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax sponsor disputed Sponsor cannot duplicate the issue, or otherwise disagrees this is an issue

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-07-fractional/blob/8f2697ae727c60c93ea47276f8fa128369abfe51/src/Vault.sol#L32
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-07-fractional/blob/8f2697ae727c60c93ea47276f8fa128369abfe51/src/modules/Buyout.sol#L53
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-07-fractional/blob/8f2697ae727c60c93ea47276f8fa128369abfe51/src/modules/Migration.sol#L63

Vulnerability details

Impact

If this contracts receive eth and this eth could get stuck in the contract

Proof of Concept

Tools Used

Manual Review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Remove the receive function of Vault contract and modules contracts:

@code423n4 code423n4 added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Warden finding labels Jul 14, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 14, 2022
@0x0aa0 0x0aa0 added the sponsor disputed Sponsor cannot duplicate the issue, or otherwise disagrees this is an issue label Jul 19, 2022
@HardlyDifficult
Copy link
Collaborator

This seems to be required for Migration. But the test suite passes with the others removed. Since this is about protecting against user error, lowing sev and merging with the warden's QA report #554

@HardlyDifficult HardlyDifficult added duplicate Another warden found this issue QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax and removed 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value labels Aug 4, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Warden finding duplicate Another warden found this issue QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax sponsor disputed Sponsor cannot duplicate the issue, or otherwise disagrees this is an issue
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants