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

No Check for '0' feeAmount #691

Closed
c4-bot-5 opened this issue Jan 23, 2024 · 6 comments
Closed

No Check for '0' feeAmount #691

c4-bot-5 opened this issue Jan 23, 2024 · 6 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-157 edited-by-warden insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards

Comments

@c4-bot-5
Copy link
Contributor

c4-bot-5 commented Jan 23, 2024

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-01-decent/blob/011f62059f3a0b1f3577c8ccd1140f0cf3e7bb29/src/UTB.sol#L228

Vulnerability details

Impact

Potential Denial of Service (DoS) Attack with FeeAmount Check

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-01-decent/blob/011f62059f3a0b1f3577c8ccd1140f0cf3e7bb29/src/UTB.sol#L108

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-01-decent/blob/011f62059f3a0b1f3577c8ccd1140f0cf3e7bb29/src/UTB.sol#L259

In the code at line number 236 in the UTB.sol, there is a modifier that does not checks if the FeeAmount is 0. This condition, if not handled properly, can be exploited to perform a Denial of Service (DoS) attack by causing the affected functionality to be repeatedly called without incurring any fees.

If the FeeAmount is set to 0, the modifier will always fail, preventing the execution of the intended functionality.

Recommended Mitigation Steps

It is recommended to review the logic in the https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-01-decent/blob/011f62059f3a0b1f3577c8ccd1140f0cf3e7bb29/src/UTB.sol#L228 modifier and ensure that a FeeAmount of 0 is handled appropriately to prevent potential DoS attacks.
Add this on Line #233

require(feeCollector.FeeAmount > 0, "FeeAmount must be greater than 0");






## Assessed type

DoS
@c4-bot-5 c4-bot-5 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 23, 2024
c4-bot-10 added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 23, 2024
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as sufficient quality report

@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added the sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality label Jan 25, 2024
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #15

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as not a duplicate

@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality and removed duplicate-15 sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality labels Jan 26, 2024
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as insufficient quality report

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #157

@c4-judge
Copy link

c4-judge commented Feb 2, 2024

alex-ppg marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Invalid

@c4-judge c4-judge added the unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards label Feb 2, 2024
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 duplicate-157 edited-by-warden insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants