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

[NAZ-M7] Value Range Validity for Fee Setter #591

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Dec 16, 2022 · 3 comments
Closed

[NAZ-M7] Value Range Validity for Fee Setter #591

code423n4 opened this issue Dec 16, 2022 · 3 comments
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 duplicate-377 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-12-tigris/blob/main/contracts/PairsContract.sol#L104

Vulnerability details

Impact

This function is used to update the fee multiplier per asset and doesn't have any checks to ensure that the variables being set is within some kind of value range.

Proof of Concept

If set poorly on accidentally or by a malicious owner this could be set to a high value and steal funds from users.

Tools Used

Manual Review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Each variable input parameter updated should have it's own value range checks to ensure their validity otherwise it could cause increased issues for users.
@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 Dec 16, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 16, 2022
@code423n4
0xNazgul issue #591
192fd7d
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as duplicate of #514

C4-Staff added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 6, 2023
@C4-Staff
original risk added for issue #591
3e24f92
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as duplicate of #377

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

GalloDaSballo marked the issue as satisfactory

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Jan 22, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
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 duplicate-377 satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@code423n4 @c4-judge