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

Permanent infinite approval of assets gives EigenLayer Strategy Manager more access than necessary #244

Closed
c4-submissions opened this issue Nov 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-70 grade-b insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax

Comments

@c4-submissions
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-11-kelp/blob/main/src/NodeDelegator.sol#L45

Vulnerability details

Impact

The NodeDelegator.maxApproveToEigenStrategyManager() function sets an infinite approval for the corresponding asset to the EigenLayer Strategy Manager.
In the current implementation this function must be called in order to deposit the asset into the EigenLayer Strategy Manager. There is no functionality to revoke or reduce the approval.
In case the EigenLayer Strategy Manager was compromised, this approval would put the full amount of the asset held by the NodeDelegator at risk, even if the NodeDelegator contract was paused. This drastically reduces the effectiveness of such countermeasures.

Proof of Concept

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-11-kelp/blob/main/src/NodeDelegator.sol#L45

IERC20(asset).approve(eigenlayerStrategyManagerAddress, type(uint256).max);

Tools Used

Manual review.

Recommended Mitigation Steps

  • Instead of setting a permanent infinite approval once, set an approval for the specific amount that should be deposited into the EigenLayer Strategy Manager in NodeDelegator.depositAssetIntoStrategy() before depositIntoStrategy() is called.

Assessed type

ERC20

@c4-submissions c4-submissions 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 13, 2023
c4-submissions added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 13, 2023
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as insufficient quality report

@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added the insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality label Nov 16, 2023
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #70

@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 Nov 29, 2023
@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

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working downgraded by judge Judge downgraded the risk level of this issue duplicate-70 grade-b insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality QA (Quality Assurance) Assets are not at risk. State handling, function incorrect as to spec, issues with clarity, syntax
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants