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

claimYieldFeeShares reset the yieldFeeBalance #207

Closed
c4-bot-1 opened this issue Mar 11, 2024 · 5 comments
Closed

claimYieldFeeShares reset the yieldFeeBalance #207

c4-bot-1 opened this issue Mar 11, 2024 · 5 comments
Labels
3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly bug Something isn't working duplicate-59 🤖_10_group AI based duplicate group recommendation satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge

Comments

@c4-bot-1
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-03-pooltogether/blob/480d58b9e8611c13587f28811864aea138a0021a/pt-v5-vault/src/PrizeVault.sol#L617

Vulnerability details

Impact

After the yieldFeeRecipient invokes part of the yield fee, all yield fee will be reset, and the yieldFeeRecipient cannot obtain the remaining fee, resulting in the loss of user funds.

Proof of Concept

Let's look at this function,yieldFeeBalance should subtract _shares instead of _yieldFeeBalance:

    function claimYieldFeeShares(uint256 _shares) external onlyYieldFeeRecipient {
        if (_shares == 0) revert MintZeroShares();

        uint256 _yieldFeeBalance = yieldFeeBalance;
        if (_shares > _yieldFeeBalance) revert SharesExceedsYieldFeeBalance(_shares, _yieldFeeBalance);

@>      yieldFeeBalance -= _yieldFeeBalance;

        _mint(msg.sender, _shares);

        emit ClaimYieldFeeShares(msg.sender, _shares);
    }

Tools Used

vscode, manual

Recommended Mitigation Steps

    function claimYieldFeeShares(uint256 _shares) external onlyYieldFeeRecipient {
        if (_shares == 0) revert MintZeroShares();

        uint256 _yieldFeeBalance = yieldFeeBalance;
        if (_shares > _yieldFeeBalance) revert SharesExceedsYieldFeeBalance(_shares, _yieldFeeBalance);

-       yieldFeeBalance -= _yieldFeeBalance;
+       yieldFeeBalance -= _shares;

        _mint(msg.sender, _shares);

        emit ClaimYieldFeeShares(msg.sender, _shares);
    }

Assessed type

Error

@c4-bot-1 c4-bot-1 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 Mar 11, 2024
c4-bot-2 added a commit that referenced this issue Mar 11, 2024
@c4-bot-12 c4-bot-12 added the 🤖_10_group AI based duplicate group recommendation label Mar 11, 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 Mar 11, 2024
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #10

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #59

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

hansfriese changed the severity to 3 (High Risk)

@c4-judge c4-judge added 3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge and removed 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value labels Mar 15, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

hansfriese marked the issue as satisfactory

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Mar 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly bug Something isn't working duplicate-59 🤖_10_group AI based duplicate group recommendation satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants