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

No slippage control #55

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Aug 3, 2023 · 5 comments
Closed

No slippage control #55

code423n4 opened this issue Aug 3, 2023 · 5 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-260 grade-c QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L198-L199
https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L200

Vulnerability details

Impact

Not specifying the minimum amount of tokens to be added to the liquidity pool

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L198-L199

shouldn't set the deadline to block.timestamp as a validator can hold the transaction and the block it is eventually put into will be block.timestamp, so this offers no protection

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L200

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L198-L199
https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-08-goodentry/blob/main/contracts/TokenisableRange.sol#L200

Tools Used

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Recommend to add deadline check and add slippage control.

Assessed type

MEV
@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 Aug 3, 2023
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Aug 3, 2023
@code423n4
IceBear issue #55
56beaa0
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

141345 marked the issue as duplicate of #78

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

141345 marked the issue as duplicate of #260

@c4-judge
Copy link

gzeon-c4 marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Insufficient proof

@c4-judge c4-judge added unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards 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 Aug 20, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link

gzeon-c4 changed the severity to QA (Quality Assurance)

@c4-judge
Copy link

gzeon-c4 marked the issue as grade-c

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 duplicate-260 grade-c QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@code423n4 @c4-judge @c4-pre-sort