The bid
function currently lacks code to track the number of bids placed by each client.
Because of this, a client can place two or more bids.
Clients can place multiple bids in the protocol, but only the latest bid's amount will be stored in the bit_values
map. Due to this vulnerability, there will be a discrepancy between the client's token balance and the amount recorded in bit_values
. This mismatch can lead to potential issues and exploitation within the protocol.
Clients cannot withdraw their entire funds from the protocol due to the current limitations in the implementation. This constraint may lead to incomplete or mismatched transactions, affecting the reliability and integrity of the protocol.
manual review
Let's rethink the protocol with improvements to enhance security and functionality:
State Management: Implement enums to manage auction states (e.g., NotStarted, Active, Ended) rather than boolean flags. This avoids confusion and enhances readability.
Reentrancy Guard: Use a reentrancy guard in the withdraw
function to prevent reentrancy attacks.
Tracking Bids: Ensure each bid is tracked. Implement logic to handle multiple bids from the same user.
Secure Timestamp: Instead of relying on block.timestamp
, consider using a trusted oracle for timekeeping.
Balance Management: Update balances correctly before transferring funds to avoid inconsistencies.
Here’s a revised version of the key functions:
or if not
In the `bid` function the bid values are stored using `self.bid_values.entry(sender).write(amount)` directly, but this overwrites any previous bids made by the same bidder. Therefore if a participant makes 2 or more bids, the participant can then withdraw only the last value of the last bid. That is incorrect, the protocol should save all bids and a participant should withdraw the value of the all unsuccessful bids.
The contest is live. Earn rewards by submitting a finding.
This is your time to appeal against judgements on your submissions.
Appeals are being carefully reviewed by our judges.