Rubicon contest - JMukesh's results

An order book protocol for Ethereum, built on L2s.

General Information

Platform: Code4rena

Start Date: 23/05/2022

Pot Size: $50,000 USDC

Total HM: 44

Participants: 99

Period: 5 days

Judge: hickuphh3

Total Solo HM: 11

Id: 129

League: ETH

Rubicon

Findings Distribution

Researcher Performance

Rank: 78/99

Findings: 3

Award: $60.41

🌟 Selected for report: 0

🚀 Solo Findings: 0

Findings Information

Awards

8.2687 USDC - $8.27

Labels

bug
duplicate
2 (Med Risk)

External Links

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconRouter.sol#L548 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconRouter.sol#L491 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconRouter.sol#L451 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconRouter.sol#L356

Vulnerability details

Impact

Use of transfer might render ETH impossible to withdraw becuase after istanbul hardfork , there is increases in the gas cost of the SLOAD operation and therefore breaks some existing smart contracts.Those contracts will break because their fallback functions used to consume less than 2300 gas, and they’ll now consume more, since 2300 the amount of gas a contract’s fallback function receives if it’s called via Solidity’s transfer() or send() methods. Any smart contract that uses transfer() or send() is taking a hard dependency on gas costs by forwarding a fixed amount of gas: 2300.

Proof of Concept

https://consensys.net/diligence/blog/2019/09/stop-using-soliditys-transfer-now/

Tools Used

manual review

use call() to send eth

#0 - bghughes

2022-06-07T22:35:51Z

Duplicate of #82

#0 - bghughes

2022-06-03T20:05:10Z

Duplicate of #316

1. Lack of access modifier in function's which initializes state variable that are used throughout the contracts

Impact

Due to lack of access modifier anyone can frontrun and initializes its own implementation

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconRouter.sol#L41

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/rubiconPools/BathToken.sol#L181

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/rubiconPools/BathPair.sol#L115

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/rubiconPools/BathHouse.sol#L97

Tools Used

manual reveiw

add access modifier

2. Setting owner should be two step function

Impact

Lack of two-step procedure for critical operations leaves them error-prone if the address is incorrect, the new address will take on the functionality of the new role immediately

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-05-rubicon/blob/8c312a63a91193c6a192a9aab44ff980fbfd7741/contracts/RubiconMarket.sol#L22

Tools Used

manual review

use two step function to change owner

AuditHub

A portfolio for auditors, a security profile for protocols, a hub for web3 security.

Built bymalatrax © 2024

Auditors

Browse

Contests

Browse

Get in touch

ContactTwitter