NFTBridge
60,000 USDC
View results
Submission Details
Severity: low
Invalid

Lack of Replay Protection

Summary

A malicious actor could repeatedly replay the same transaction to transfer tokens multiple times. Since there is no mechanism to mark a request as processed, this can lead to multiple token transactions, effectively stealing tokens.

Vulnerability Details

The depositTokens function does not store the hash of the request, leaving it vulnerable to reply in the same transaction multiple times to steal tokens

function depositTokens(
uint256 salt,
address collectionL1,
snaddress ownerL2,
uint256[] calldata ids,
bool useAutoBurn
)
external
payable
{
if (!Cairo.isFelt252(snaddress.unwrap(ownerL2))) {
revert CairoWrapError();
}
if (!_enabled) {
revert BridgeNotEnabledError();
}
CollectionType ctype = TokenUtil.detectInterface(collectionL1);
if (ctype == CollectionType.ERC1155) {
revert NotSupportedYetError();
}
if (!_isWhiteListed(collectionL1)) {
revert NotWhiteListedError();
}
Request memory req;
// The withdraw auto is only available for request originated from
// Starknet side as the withdraw on starknet is automatically done
// by the sequencer.
req.header = Protocol.requestHeaderV1(ctype, useAutoBurn, false);
req.hash = Protocol.requestHash(salt, collectionL1, ownerL2, ids);
// TODO: store request hash in storage to avoid replay attack.
// or can it be safe to use block timestamp? Not sure as
// several tx may have the exact same block.
req.collectionL1 = collectionL1;
req.collectionL2 = _l1ToL2Addresses[collectionL1];
req.ownerL1 = msg.sender;
req.ownerL2 = ownerL2;
if (ctype == CollectionType.ERC721) {
(req.name, req.symbol, req.uri, req.tokenURIs) = TokenUtil.erc721Metadata(
collectionL1,
ids
);
} else {
(req.uri) = TokenUtil.erc1155Metadata(collectionL1);
}
_depositIntoEscrow(ctype, collectionL1, ids);
req.tokenIds = ids;
uint256[] memory payload = Protocol.requestSerialize(req);
if (payload.length >= MAX_PAYLOAD_LENGTH) {
revert TooManyTokensError();
}
IStarknetMessaging(_starknetCoreAddress).sendMessageToL2{value: msg.value}(
snaddress.unwrap(_starklaneL2Address),
felt252.unwrap(_starklaneL2Selector),
payload
);
emit DepositRequestInitiated(req.hash, block.timestamp, payload);
}

PoC

Step 1: Assume an attacker initiates a valid token deposit using the depositTokens function

Step 2: The attacker captures the transaction data(salt, collectionL1, ownerL2, ids, and useAutoBurn).

Step3: The attacker replays the captured transaction multiple times by sending the same data to the depositTokens function.

Step 4: Since the contract does not store the hash and check for duplicates, it processes the replayed transaction each time, leading to unauthorised multiple deposits and potential loss of tokens

Code snippet

function depositTokens(
uint256 salt,
address collectionL1,
snaddress ownerL2,
uint256[] calldata ids,
bool useAutoBurn
)
external
payable
{
if (!Cairo.isFelt252(snaddress.unwrap(ownerL2))) {
revert CairoWrapError();
}
if (!_enabled) {
revert BridgeNotEnabledError();
}
CollectionType ctype = TokenUtil.detectInterface(collectionL1);
if (ctype == CollectionType.ERC1155) {
revert NotSupportedYetError();
}
if (!_isWhiteListed(collectionL1)) {
revert NotWhiteListedError();
}
Request memory req;
// The withdraw auto is only available for request originated from
// Starknet side as the withdraw on starknet is automatically done
// by the sequencer.
req.header = Protocol.requestHeaderV1(ctype, useAutoBurn, false);
req.hash = Protocol.requestHash(salt, collectionL1, ownerL2, ids);
// TODO: store request hash in storage to avoid replay attack.
// or can it be safe to use block timestamp? Not sure as
// several tx may have the exact same block.
req.collectionL1 = collectionL1;
req.collectionL2 = _l1ToL2Addresses[collectionL1];
req.ownerL1 = msg.sender;
req.ownerL2 = ownerL2;
if (ctype == CollectionType.ERC721) {
(req.name, req.symbol, req.uri, req.tokenURIs) = TokenUtil.erc721Metadata(
collectionL1,
ids
);
} else {
(req.uri) = TokenUtil.erc1155Metadata(collectionL1);
}
_depositIntoEscrow(ctype, collectionL1, ids);
req.tokenIds = ids;
uint256[] memory payload = Protocol.requestSerialize(req);
if (payload.length >= MAX_PAYLOAD_LENGTH) {
revert TooManyTokensError();
}
IStarknetMessaging(_starknetCoreAddress).sendMessageToL2{value: msg.value}(
snaddress.unwrap(_starklaneL2Address),
felt252.unwrap(_starklaneL2Selector),
payload
);
emit DepositRequestInitiated(req.hash, block.timestamp, payload);
}

Impact

Loss could be the total value of all replayed tokens. If 1,000 tokens are worth $100 each, and the transaction is replayed 5 times, the loss could be $500,000

Tools Used

Manual review

Recommendations

Implement replay protection by storing each request hash and checking it before processing the transaction

mapping(bytes32 => bool)public
processedRequests;
function depositTokens(
uint256 salt,
address collectionL1,
snaddress ownerL2,
uint256[] calldata ids,
bool useAutoBurn
)
external
payable
{
bytes32 reqHash =
Protocol.requestHash(salt, collectionL1, ownerL2, ids);
require(!
processedRequests[reqHash], "Request already processed");
// Process the deposit....
processedRequests[reqHash] = true;
}
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

n0kto Lead Judge about 1 year ago
Submission Judgement Published
Invalidated
Reason: Incorrect statement
Assigned finding tags:

invalid-replay-attack-hash-not-stored-nonce-not-used

There is no impact here: Transaction cannot be replayed because the blockchain use the nonce in the signature. Hash is computed on-chain. Using or trying to have the same hash mean you need to buy the token, and they will be sent to their origin owner. Why an attacker would buy tokens to give them back ? No real impact.

Support

FAQs

Can't find an answer? Chat with us on Discord, Twitter or Linkedin.