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

Possible freezing of funds in the PhiNFT1155.sol contract #153

Open
howlbot-integration bot opened this issue Sep 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

Possible freezing of funds in the PhiNFT1155.sol contract #153

howlbot-integration bot opened this issue Sep 6, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-75 grade-b Q-31 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax 🤖_44_group AI based duplicate group recommendation sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality

Comments

@howlbot-integration
Copy link

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-08-phi/blob/main/src/art/PhiNFT1155.sol#L359-L361

Vulnerability details

Proof of Concept

The PhiNFT1155.sol contract has a receive() external payable function. It allows you to accept eth into the contract. The user can successfully send eth. However, there is no function to withdraw eth from the contract. Eth will remain in the contract forever.

Tools Used

Manual review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Provide a function to output eth from a contract

Assessed type

ETH-Transfer
@howlbot-integration howlbot-integration bot added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value 🤖_44_group AI based duplicate group recommendation bug Something isn't working duplicate-75 sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality labels Sep 6, 2024
howlbot-integration bot added a commit that referenced this issue Sep 6, 2024
@howlbot-integration
Inspecktor issue #153
69b8123
@c4-judge c4-judge added the satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards label Sep 12, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

fatherGoose1 marked the issue as satisfactory

@c4-judge c4-judge added unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards and removed satisfactory satisfies C4 submission criteria; eligible for awards labels Sep 14, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

fatherGoose1 marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Invalid

@c4-judge c4-judge added downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax and removed 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value labels Sep 18, 2024
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

fatherGoose1 changed the severity to QA (Quality Assurance)

@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

fatherGoose1 marked the issue as grade-b

@c4-judge c4-judge added grade-b and removed unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards labels Sep 23, 2024
@C4-Staff C4-Staff reopened this Sep 24, 2024
@C4-Staff C4-Staff added the Q-31 label Sep 24, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-75 grade-b Q-31 QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax 🤖_44_group AI based duplicate group recommendation sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@c4-judge @C4-Staff