Canto contest - ignacio's results

Execution layer for original work.

General Information

Platform: Code4rena

Start Date: 14/06/2022

Pot Size: $100,000 USDC

Total HM: 26

Participants: 59

Period: 7 days

Judge: GalloDaSballo

Total Solo HM: 9

Id: 133

League: ETH

Canto

Findings Distribution

Researcher Performance

Rank: 49/59

Findings: 1

Award: $183.51

🌟 Selected for report: 0

πŸš€ Solo Findings: 0

Awards

72.3997 USDC - $72.40

687.9945 CANTO - $111.11

Labels

bug
QA (Quality Assurance)

External Links

Lines of code

https://github.com/Plex-Engineer/zeroswap/blob/03507a80322112f4f3c723fc68bed0f138702836/contracts/mocks/WETH9Mock.sol#L26 https://github.com/Plex-Engineer/zeroswap/blob/0fa049912bc14c27ba60efbada23fc1cc18b04e4/test/SushiToken.test.ts#L46 https://github.com/Plex-Engineer/zeroswap/blob/0fa049912bc14c27ba60efbada23fc1cc18b04e4/test/SushiMaker.test.ts#L52 https://github.com/Plex-Engineer/zeroswap/blob/0fa049912bc14c27ba60efbada23fc1cc18b04e4/contracts/SushiBar.sol#L49

Vulnerability details

Vulnerability details

CALL() SHOULD BE USED INSTEAD OF TRANSFER() ON AN ADDRESS PAYABLE

The use of the deprecated transfer() function for an address will inevitably make the transaction fail when:

-The claimer smart contract does implement a payable fallback which uses more than 2300 gas unit. -The claimer smart contract implements a payable fallback function that needs less than 2300 gas units but is called through proxy, raising the call’s gas usage above 2300 and using higher than 2300 gas might be mandatory for some multisig wallets. -The claimer smart contract does not implement a payable function.

#0 - nivasan1

2022-06-23T04:13:57Z

duplicate of #14

AuditHub

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

Built bymalatrax Β© 2024

Auditors

Browse

Contests

Browse

Get in touch

ContactTwitter