According to the Tokenized Strategies documentation, once a strategy is shut down, no new assets should be deployed into the system. However, in StrategyArb, StrategyMainnet, and StrategyOp contracts, even after the strategy is shut down, a keeper can still call the claimAndSwap function. This function claims underlying assets and reintroduces them into the transmuter, effectively redeploying new assets post-shutdown, contrary to the intended behavior.
The Tokenized Strategies documentation clearly states that upon shutdown, the strategy should prevent the deployment of any new assets. Yet, these contracts allow claimAndSwap calls after shutdown. While deposits and mints are blocked as intended, the claimAndSwap function lets a keeper claim underlying tokens and swap them back into the asset, depositing them into the transmuter. This unintentionally enables asset reinsertion into the system even after it is considered terminated.
In the canonical _harvestAndReport function shown in the documentation, safeguards exist to ensure no redeployment occurs once the strategy is shutdown. The current implementations in the provided strategies lack a similar check, allowing claim and swap operations that effectively circumvent the shutdown condition.
Financial Manipulation: Continuous asset deployment post-shutdown can be leveraged to manipulate the system’s financial state, potentially leading to unexpected losses or imbalances.
System Instability: Persistent redeployment may cause inconsistencies in asset tracking, reporting, and overall strategy performance, making it difficult to maintain accurate records and recover funds if needed.
Trust and Reputation Damage: Stakeholders rely on the assurance that a shutdown effectively halts all operations. Failure to enforce this can lead to loss of confidence, adversely affecting user engagement and platform reputation.
Regulatory Concerns: Inconsistent behavior post-shutdown might attract regulatory scrutiny, especially if it leads to financial discrepancies or perceived negligence in safeguarding assets.
Given these factors, the vulnerability’s impact extends beyond mere operational inconsistencies, posing significant risks to financial integrity and stakeholder trust.
Manual Code Review and Foundry
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.