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

Incorrect comparison in the _updatePosition of ConcentratedLiquidityPool #91

Open
code423n4 opened this issue Oct 6, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Incorrect comparison in the _updatePosition of ConcentratedLiquidityPool #91

code423n4 opened this issue Oct 6, 2021 · 0 comments
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Warden finding sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

broccoli

Vulnerability details

Impact

The _updatePosition function of ConcentratedLiquidityPool uses the < operator to ensure a user's liquidity does not exceed the maximum. However, we should use the <= operator instead.

Proof of Concept

Referenced code:
ConcentratedLiquidityPool.sol#L549

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Change < to <= in the referenced line of code.
@code423n4 code423n4 added 1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Warden finding labels Oct 6, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Oct 6, 2021
@code423n4
broccoli issue #91
17303a4
@sarangparikh22 sarangparikh22 added the sponsor acknowledged Technically the issue is correct, but we're not going to resolve it for XYZ reasons label Oct 13, 2021
@CloudEllie CloudEllie reopened this Nov 8, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Warden finding 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
3 participants
@sarangparikh22 @code423n4 @CloudEllie