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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

withdrawRemainingTokens in Erc20Quest could be called several times by the owner, allowing him to withdraw part of the non-claimable tokens #638

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

withdrawRemainingTokens in Erc20Quest could be called several times by the owner, allowing him to withdraw part of the non-claimable tokens #638

code423n4 opened this issue Jan 30, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue grade-b QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/rabbitholegg/quest-protocol/blob/main/contracts/Erc20Quest.sol#L81-L87

Vulnerability details

Impact

This would allow the owner to steal the ERC20 rewards which have not yet been claimed after the end of the claim, contradicting the natspec of withdrawRemainingTokens

Proof of Concept

The owner simply has to wait the end of the quest and then call multiple times the withdrawRemainingTokens function.

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Add a state variable ownerHasWithdrawnRemaining which would be set to true the first time the owner calls withdrawRemainingTokens, and add a require(!ownerHasWithdrawnRemaining) at the start of the function.
@code423n4 code423n4 added 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 labels Jan 30, 2023
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 30, 2023
@code423n4
jat issue #638
4211660
@kirk-baird
Copy link

This is true but I don't see the benefit to calling this multiple times

@c4-judge c4-judge added downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of 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 Feb 6, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

c4-judge commented Feb 6, 2023

kirk-baird changed the severity to QA (Quality Assurance)

@c4-sponsor c4-sponsor added the sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons label Feb 7, 2023
@c4-sponsor
Copy link

waynehoover marked the issue as sponsor acknowledged

@kirk-baird kirk-baird mentioned this issue Feb 14, 2023
Open
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

kirk-baird marked the issue as grade-b

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue grade-b QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
5 participants
@kirk-baird @code423n4 @c4-judge @c4-sponsor @C4-Staff