Tadle
Tadle
DeFiFoundry
27,750 USDC
View results
Previous Next
Submission Details
Severity: high
Valid

Incorrect address used when TokenManager calls `CapitalPool.approve` function

bkweb3

Summary

Token transfers are managed in TokenManager::_transfer function, where function are transferred to and from the CapitalPool. When an allowance is required, incorrect address is passed in CapitalPool.approve(), which will cause the whole transaction to fail.

Vulnerability Details

Whenever tokens need to be transferred from Capital Pool and the allowance is 0, TokenManager calls CapitalPool to approve TokenManager to send the corresponding token.

if (
_from == _capitalPoolAddr &&
IERC20(_token).allowance(_from, address(this)) == 0x0
) {
ICapitalPool(_capitalPoolAddr).approve(address(this));
}

The issue is that CapitalPool.approve function expects the token address to be passed instead of the TokenManager's address

CapitalPool.approve

/**
* @dev Approve token for token manager
* @notice only can be called by token manager
* @param tokenAddr address of token
*/
function approve(address tokenAddr) external {
address tokenManager = tadleFactory.relatedContracts(
RelatedContractLibraries.TOKEN_MANAGER
);
// @issue Not all tokens support max approval
(bool success, ) = tokenAddr.call(
abi.encodeWithSelector(
APPROVE_SELECTOR,
tokenManager,
type(uint256).max
)
);
​
if (!success) {
revert ApproveFailed();
}
}

Impact

Withdraw action will always revert unless CapitalPool.approve(token)is called externally

Tools Used

Manual Review

Recommendations

Replace the

if (
_from == _capitalPoolAddr &&
IERC20(_token).allowance(_from, address(this)) == 0x0
) {
- ICapitalPool(_capitalPoolAddr).approve(address(this));
+ ICapitalPool(_capitalPoolAddr).approve(_token);
}
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

0xnevi Lead Judge 12 months ago
Submission Judgement Published
Validated
Assigned finding tags:

finding-TokenManager-approve-wrong-address-input

If we consider the correct permissioned implementation for the `approve()` function within `CapitalPool.sol`, this would be a critical severity issue, because the withdrawal of funds will be permanently blocked and must be rescued by the admin via the `Rescuable.sol` contract, given it will always revert [here](https://github.com/Cyfrin/2024-08-tadle/blob/04fd8634701697184a3f3a5558b41c109866e5f8/src/core/CapitalPool.sol#L36-L38) when attempting to call a non-existent function selector `approve` within the TokenManager contract. The argument up in the air is since the approval function `approve` was made permisionless, the `if` block within the internal `_transfer()` function will never be invoked if somebody beforehand calls approval for the TokenManager for the required token, so the transfer will infact not revert when a withdrawal is invoked. I will leave open for escalation discussions, but based on my first point, I believe high severity is appropriate.

Support

FAQs

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