Tadle

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

wrong function call in `TokenManager::withdraw`, will lead to user loss of funds.

Summary

using TokenManager::_safe_transfer_from instead of TokenManager::_transfer in the case it is ERC20 token, will make the function not operate correctly.

Vulnerability Details

The `withdraw function allows users to claim ETH or ERC20 tokens:

/**
* @notice Withdraw
* @dev Caller must be owner
* @param _tokenAddress Token address
* @param _tokenBalanceType Token balance type
*/
function withdraw(
address _tokenAddress,
TokenBalanceType _tokenBalanceType
) external whenNotPaused {
uint256 claimAbleAmount = userTokenBalanceMap[_msgSender()][
_tokenAddress
][_tokenBalanceType];
if (claimAbleAmount == 0) {
return;
}
address capitalPoolAddr = tadleFactory.relatedContracts(
RelatedContractLibraries.CAPITAL_POOL
);
if (_tokenAddress == wrappedNativeToken) {
/**
* @dev token is native token
* @dev transfer from capital pool to msg sender
* @dev withdraw native token to token manager contract
* @dev transfer native token to msg sender
*/
_transfer(
wrappedNativeToken,
capitalPoolAddr,
address(this),
claimAbleAmount,
capitalPoolAddr
);
IWrappedNativeToken(wrappedNativeToken).withdraw(claimAbleAmount);
payable(msg.sender).transfer(claimAbleAmount);
} else {
/**
* @dev token is ERC20 token
* @dev transfer from capital pool to msg sender
*/
_safe_transfer_from(
_tokenAddress,
capitalPoolAddr,
_msgSender(),
claimAbleAmount
);
}
emit Withdraw(
_msgSender(),
_tokenAddress,
_tokenBalanceType,
claimAbleAmount
);
}

however, if the token address is not WETH, the function call _safe_transfer_from, instead of _transfer.

else {
/**
* @dev token is ERC20 token
* @dev transfer from capital pool to msg sender
*/
@> _safe_transfer_from(
_tokenAddress,
capitalPoolAddr,
_msgSender(),
claimAbleAmount
);
}

the function _transfer is making sure that there's approval, calls _safe_transfer_from , and implements a mechanism to make sure tokens has really transferred:

/**
* @notice Internal Function: Transfer token
* @dev Transfer ERC20 token
* @param _token ERC20 token address
* @param _from From address
* @param _to To address
* @param _amount Transfer amount
*/
function _transfer(
address _token,
address _from,
address _to,
uint256 _amount,
address _capitalPoolAddr
) internal {
uint256 fromBalanceBef = IERC20(_token).balanceOf(_from);
uint256 toBalanceBef = IERC20(_token).balanceOf(_to);
if (
_from == _capitalPoolAddr &&
IERC20(_token).allowance(_from, address(this)) == 0x0
) {
@> ICapitalPool(_capitalPoolAddr).approve(address(this));
}
@> _safe_transfer_from(_token, _from, _to, _amount);
uint256 fromBalanceAft = IERC20(_token).balanceOf(_from);
uint256 toBalanceAft = IERC20(_token).balanceOf(_to);
if (fromBalanceAft != fromBalanceBef - _amount) {
revert TransferFailed();
}
if (toBalanceAft != toBalanceBef + _amount) {
revert TransferFailed();
}
}

Impact

If the tokens are need to be approved, the withdraw functon will not work on ERC20 tokens, and the additional check will not happen.

Tools Used

manual review

Recommendations

instead of calling _safe_transfer_from call:

_transfer(_tokenAddress, capitalPoolAddr, _msgSender(), claimAbleAmount, capitalPoolAddr);
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

0xnevi Lead Judge about 1 year ago
Submission Judgement Published
Validated
Assigned finding tags:

finding-TokenManager-safeTransferFrom-withdraw-missing-approve

This issue's severity has similar reasonings to #252, whereby 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. Similarly, the argument here is the approval function `approve` was made permisionless, so if somebody beforehand calls approval for the TokenManager for the required token, 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. It also has a slightly different root cause and fix whereby an explicit approval needs to be provided before a call to `_safe_transfer_from()`, if not, the alternative `_transfer()` function should be used to provide an approval, assuming a fix was implemented for issue #252

Support

FAQs

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