QuantAMM
QuantAMM
49,600 OP
View results
Previous Next
Submission Details
Severity: low
Invalid

Mismatched types lead to incorrect `blockTimestampDeposit` values

ragnarok

Summary

The UpliftOnlyExample::FeeData struct defines the blockTimestampDeposit field as uint40. However, in the UpliftOnlyExample::afterUpdate function, this field is assigned a value of type uint32. This mismatch leads to an incorrect value being stored in the blockTimestampDeposit field when block.number exceeds the maximum value of uint32. (Another issue in the same line is mentioned in a separate report)

UpliftOnlyExample::afterUpdate function:

function afterUpdate(address _from, address _to, uint256 _tokenID) public {
...
if (tokenIdIndexFound) {
if (_to != address(0)) {
feeDataArray[tokenIdIndex].lpTokenDepositValue = lpTokenDepositValueNow;
=> feeDataArray[tokenIdIndex].blockTimestampDeposit = uint32(block.number);
feeDataArray[tokenIdIndex].upliftFeeBps = upliftFeeBps;
...
}
}
}

Impact

If block.number surpasses the maximum value of the uint32 type, the blockTimestampDeposit field in the FeeData struct will store an incorrect value.

Updates

Lead Judging Commences

n0kto Lead Judge 10 months ago
Submission Judgement Published
Invalidated
Reason: Non-acceptable severity
Assigned finding tags:

Informational or Gas / Admin is trusted / Pool creation is trusted / User mistake / Suppositions

Please read the CodeHawks documentation to know which submissions are valid. If you disagree, provide a coded PoC and explain the real likelyhood and the detailed impact on the mainnet without any supposition (if, it could, etc) to prove your point.

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!