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

Outdated oracle price #254

Closed
c4-submissions opened this issue Nov 13, 2023 · 6 comments
Closed

Outdated oracle price #254

c4-submissions opened this issue Nov 13, 2023 · 6 comments
Labels
3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly bug Something isn't working duplicate-34 insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards

Comments

@c4-submissions
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-11-kelp/blob/main/src/oracles/ChainlinkPriceOracle.sol#L37-L39

Vulnerability details

Impact

Oracle's price might be non actual, and might lead to wrong asset prices. And wrong asset prices will lead to wrong amount of rsETH to mint.

Proof of Concept

Let's consider this function:

    function getAssetPrice(address asset) external view onlySupportedAsset(asset) returns (uint256) {
        return AggregatorInterface(assetPriceFeed[asset]).latestAnswer();
    }

This function extracts price from ChainLink.

  • At the first latestAnswer is deprecated.
  • At the second price can be updated a long time ago, and at moment of requesting it can be non actual.
    Current implementation doesn't check this case. And it's possible to get outdated price.

So, solution here is use latestRoundData. But additionally check response startedAt value. If it's too old (for example more than 5 minutes), then revert execution.

Tools Used

Manual review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Additionally, when returns price, checks that price is actual.

Assessed type

Oracle

@c4-submissions c4-submissions added 3 (High Risk) Assets can be stolen/lost/compromised directly 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 sufficient quality report

@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added the sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality label Nov 16, 2023
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #32

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as not a duplicate

@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as insufficient quality report

@c4-pre-sort c4-pre-sort added insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality and removed sufficient quality report This report is of sufficient quality labels Nov 17, 2023
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

raymondfam marked the issue as duplicate of #34

@c4-judge c4-judge added the unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards label Dec 1, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link
Contributor

c4-judge commented Dec 1, 2023

fatherGoose1 marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Invalid

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-34 insufficient quality report This report is not of sufficient quality unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants