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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Initilaize functions should check for address(0) #129

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Nov 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Closed

Initilaize functions should check for address(0) #129

code423n4 opened this issue Nov 29, 2021 · 2 comments
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Handle

jayjonah8

Vulnerability details

Impact

The initialize functions like the one in Malt.sol does not check if the address exits before setting it. This can lead to errors while calling initialize during deployment.

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-11-malt/blob/main/src/contracts/Auction.sol#L142

Tools Used

Manual code review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

add require checks in initialize functions like require("address" != address(0), "contract does not exists")
@code423n4 code423n4 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 Nov 29, 2021
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 29, 2021
@code423n4
jayjonah8 issue #129
3184a48
@0xScotch 0xScotch added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Dec 10, 2021
@0xScotch
Copy link
Collaborator

#74

@GalloDaSballo
Copy link
Collaborator

Duplicate of #74

@GalloDaSballo GalloDaSballo marked this as a duplicate of #74 Jan 24, 2022
@CloudEllie CloudEllie added 1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments and removed 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value labels Jan 26, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
1 (Low Risk) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with comments bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@GalloDaSballo @0xScotch @code423n4 @CloudEllie