Nibbl contest - sach1r0's results

NFT fractionalization protocol with guaranteed liquidity and price based buyout.

General Information

Platform: Code4rena

Start Date: 21/06/2022

Pot Size: $30,000 USDC

Total HM: 12

Participants: 96

Period: 3 days

Judge: HardlyDifficult

Total Solo HM: 5

Id: 140

League: ETH

Nibbl

Findings Distribution

Researcher Performance

Rank: 49/96

Findings: 2

Award: $45.58

🌟 Selected for report: 0

🚀 Solo Findings: 0

Lack of zero-address check in the constructor

Details

Lack of zero-address checks may lead to infunctional protocol.

Mitigation

Consider adding zero-address checks such as: require(_vaultImplementation != address(0));

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L23-L27


Some functions does not check for zero address

Details

It's important to check for zero-address to avoid redeploying of the contract when the address is accidentally set to zero-address.

Mitigation

Add a require statement, for example: require(_curator != address(0));

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L38-L56 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L64-L74 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L80-L86 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L88-L93 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L99-L102 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L123-L126 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L158-L161 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L173-L204 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L23-L25

#0 - mundhrakeshav

2022-06-25T18:06:25Z

Duplicate #34

#1 - HardlyDifficult

2022-07-04T19:02:18Z

Checking for 0 input is nice to have to avoid user error.

Functions that are not called within the contract must set its visibility to external instead of public

Details

Setting function's visibility to external when it is only called externally can save gas because external function’s parameters are not copied into memory and are instead read from calldata directly. see reference: https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-06-gro-findings/issues/37

Mitigation

Set function visibility to external

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L64-L74 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L76-L78 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L80-L86 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L88-L93 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Twav/Twav.sol#L44-L46


Using strict comparison operators can save gas

Details

In the EVM, there is no opcode for >= or <=. When using greater than or equal, two operations are performed: > and =. See reference: https://code4rena.com/reports/2022-04-backd/

Mitigation

I suggest changing require(basketUpdateTime != 0 && block.timestamp >= basketUpdateTime, "NibblVaultFactory: UPDATE_TIME has not passed"); to require(basketUpdateTime != 0 && block.timestamp > basketUpdateTime, "NibblVaultFactory: UPDATE_TIME has not passed"); as the difference in the comparison on the code is neglible.

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVaultFactory.sol#L107


Solidity compiler will always read the length of the array during each iteration

Details

.length in a loop can be extracted into a variable and used where necessary to reduce the number of storage reads see reference: https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-10-union-findings/issues/92

Mitigation:

This extra costs can be avoided by caching the array length. Example: uint _assetAddressesLength = _assetAddresses.length; for (uint i = 0; i < _assetAddressesLength; ++i) { }

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L506 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L525 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L547 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L43 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L70 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L93


No need to explicitly initialize variables with their default values

Details

When variables are not set, it is assumed to have it's default value(0 for uint, false for bool, address(0) for address). Explicitly initializing it with its default value is an anti-pattern and wastes gas.

Mitigation

change uint256 i = 0; to uint256 i; see reference: https://code4rena.com/reports/2022-02-jpyc/ [G-07] GENERAL RECOMMENDATIONS

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L506 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L525 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L547 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L43 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L70 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L93


Pre-increment cost less gas than post-increment

Details

i++ costs more gas than ++i , for uint pre-decrement is cheaper than post-decrement see reference: https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-12-nftx-findings/issues/195

Mitigation

change i++ to ++i

Line of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L506 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L525 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/NibblVault.sol#L547 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L43 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L70 https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-nibbl/blob/8c3dbd6adf350f35c58b31723d42117765644110/contracts/Basket.sol#L93

#0 - mundhrakeshav

2022-06-25T17:58:37Z

Duplicate #2, #3, #6, #8

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