Audit Open Original ↗
0x Protocol
Type
Security review
Client
0x Protocol
Date
2019-10
Domain
Blockchain
Effort
10 wks
Section
Ethereum/EVM
Trail of Bits's security review of 0x Protocol (Oct 2019) identified 23 issues: 3 high, 7 medium, 2 low, and 11 informational.
Findings · 23
- 1 Fee refunds incentivize transaction centralization through market makers Low
- 2 Market makers have a reduced cost for performing front-running attacks Medium
- 3 cancelOrdersUpTo can be used to permanently block future orders High
- 4 setSignatureValidatorApproval race condition may be exploitable Medium
- 5 WETH9 transferFrom o ten does not follow spec Informational
- 6 Batch processing of transaction execution and order matching may lead to exchange griefing Medium
- 7 Zero fee orders are possible if a user performs transactions with a zero gas price Medium
- 8 Lack of events for critical operations Informational
- 9 Lack of validation in the makerAssetData and takerAssetData leads to unexpected behavior Informational
- 10 Transfers with zero fee amounts can log arbitrary data in their feeAssetData Informational
- 11 MultiSigWallet does not check contract existence before call Medium
- 12 Potential over low in transactionId allowing arbitrary execution of transactions by a malicious owner Informational
- 13 Specification-Code mismatch for AssetProxyOwner timelock period High
- 14 Potential over low in MultiSigWalletWithTimelock when calculating whether the timelock has passed Low
- 15 Rounding division errors can accumulate over partial fills Informational
- 16 The Cobb–Douglas function is not properly documented and reverts with valid parameters Medium
- 17 Unclear documentation on how order filling can fail High
- 18 Potential single point of failure for "read-only-mode" and "catastrophic-failure-mode" Informational
- 19 ERC20 reverts during certain self-transfer Informational
- 20 _assertStakingPoolExists never returns true Informational
- 21 Calls to setParams may set invalid values and produce unexpected behavior in the staking contracts Medium
- 22 Malicious non-operator maker can decrease staking pool operator share Informational
- 23 Non-operator makers can add or remove other makers Informational
Findings extracted from the published report PDF. See the full report below for details and remediation.
Related