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

Always increasing gas cost of the getOwnedTokenIdsOfQuest function #466

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 3 comments
Closed
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-552 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/rabbitholegg/quest-protocol/blob/8c4c1f71221570b14a0479c216583342bd652d8d/contracts/RabbitHoleReceipt.sol#L106-L135
https://github.com/rabbitholegg/quest-protocol/blob/8c4c1f71221570b14a0479c216583342bd652d8d/contracts/RabbitHoleReceipt.sol#L95-L104

Vulnerability details

Impact

If the user often participates in quests, buys tokens he accumulates tokens that remain on his account. This leads to huge transactions cost after a while.

Proof of Concept

When user want to claim rewards Quest contract calls getOwnedTokenIdsOfQuest which iterates over all tokens which user has. All iteration cost a gas, so after a while user will have a lot of outdated tokens, but the algorithm still will be iterates over them.

        for (uint i = 0; i < msgSenderBalance; i++) {
            uint tokenId = tokenOfOwnerByIndex(claimingAddress_, i);
            if (keccak256(bytes(questIdForTokenId[tokenId])) == keccak256(bytes(questId_))) {
                tokenIdsForQuest[i] = tokenId;
                foundTokens++;
            }
        }

And this function calls from Quest's claim() transaction, therefore getOwnedTokenIdsOfQuest may use enormous gas amount.

Tools Used

Manual Audit

Recommended Mitigation Steps

In Quest contract when calling claim function, each claimed token must be burned.

@code423n4 code423n4 added 3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly bug Something isn't working labels Jan 30, 2023
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 30, 2023
@c4-judge c4-judge closed this as completed Feb 6, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

c4-judge commented Feb 6, 2023

kirk-baird marked the issue as duplicate of #135

@c4-judge c4-judge added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue and removed 3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly labels Feb 14, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

kirk-baird changed the severity to 2 (Med Risk)

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Feb 14, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

kirk-baird marked the issue as satisfactory

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-552 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants