Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 5, 2023. It is now read-only.

ctf_sec - Missing checks for whether Arbitrum Sequencer is active #142

Open
sherlock-admin opened this issue Apr 30, 2023 · 2 comments
Open
Labels
Has Duplicates A valid issue with 1+ other issues describing the same vulnerability Medium A valid Medium severity issue Reward A payout will be made for this issue Sponsor Confirmed The sponsor acknowledged this issue is valid Will Fix The sponsor confirmed this issue will be fixed

Comments

@sherlock-admin
Copy link
Contributor

ctf_sec

medium

Missing checks for whether Arbitrum Sequencer is active

Summary

Missing checks for whether Arbitrum Sequencer is active

Vulnerability Detail

the onchain deployment context is changed, in prev contest the protocol only attemps to deploy the code to ethereum while in the current contest

the protocol intends to deploy to arbtrium as well!

Chainlink recommends that users using price oracles, check whether the Arbitrum sequencer is active

https://docs.chain.link/data-feeds#l2-sequencer-uptime-feeds

If the sequencer goes down, the index oracles may have stale prices, since L2-submitted transactions (i.e. by the aggregating oracles) will not be processed.

Impact

Stale prices, e.g. if USDC were to de-peg while the sequencer is offline, stale price is used and can result in false liquidation or over-borrowing.

Code Snippet

https://github.com/sherlock-audit/2023-04-blueberry/blob/main/blueberry-core/contracts/oracle/ChainlinkAdapterOracle.sol#L76-L98

Tool used

Manual Review

Recommendation

Use sequencer oracle to determine whether the sequencer is offline or not, and don't allow orders to be executed while the sequencer is offline.

@github-actions github-actions bot added Medium A valid Medium severity issue Has Duplicates A valid issue with 1+ other issues describing the same vulnerability labels May 3, 2023
@Gornutz Gornutz added Sponsor Confirmed The sponsor acknowledged this issue is valid Will Fix The sponsor confirmed this issue will be fixed labels May 10, 2023
@sherlock-admin sherlock-admin added the Reward A payout will be made for this issue label May 20, 2023
@Gornutz
Copy link

Gornutz commented Jun 12, 2023

@IAm0x52
Copy link
Collaborator

IAm0x52 commented Jun 16, 2023

Methodology for calculating prices between L1 and L2 implementations are unexpectedly different. Need more clarification/changes before sign off

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
Has Duplicates A valid issue with 1+ other issues describing the same vulnerability Medium A valid Medium severity issue Reward A payout will be made for this issue Sponsor Confirmed The sponsor acknowledged this issue is valid Will Fix The sponsor confirmed this issue will be fixed
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants