Storage Proofs
Curve
DeFiLayer 1Layer 2
14,723 OP
View results
Previous Next
Submission Details
Severity: high
Invalid

`update_price` function lacks validation on PriceParams

bladesec

Title

update_price function lacks validation on PriceParams

Summary

The update_price function in ScrvusdOracleV2 contract lacks sufficient validation on PriceParams which could lead to an invalid state of pool.

Vulnerability Details

https://github.com/CodeHawks-Contests/2025-03-curve/blob/main/contracts/scrvusd/oracles/ScrvusdOracleV2.vy#L295-L330

Here's the implementation of update_price function:

def update_price(
_parameters: uint256[ALL_PARAM_CNT], _ts: uint256, _block_number: uint256
) -> uint256:
"""
@notice Update price using `_parameters`
@param _parameters Parameters of Yearn Vault to calculate scrvUSD price
@param _ts Timestamp at which these parameters are true
@param _block_number Block number of parameters to linearize updates
@return Absolute relative price change of final price with 10^18 precision
"""
access_control._check_role(PRICE_PARAMETERS_VERIFIER, msg.sender)
# Allowing same block updates for fixing bad blockhash provided (if possible)
assert self.last_block_number <= _block_number, "Outdated"
self.last_block_number = _block_number
​
self.last_prices = [self._price_v0(), self._price_v1(), self._price_v2()]
self.last_update = block.timestamp
​
ts: uint256 = self.price_params_ts
current_price: uint256 = self._raw_price(ts, ts)
self.price_params = PriceParams(
total_debt=_parameters[0],
total_idle=_parameters[1],
total_supply=_parameters[2],
full_profit_unlock_date=_parameters[3],
profit_unlocking_rate=_parameters[4],
last_profit_update=_parameters[5],
balance_of_self=_parameters[6],
)
self.price_params_ts = _ts
​
new_price: uint256 = self._raw_price(_ts, _ts)
log PriceUpdate(new_price, _ts, _block_number)
if new_price > current_price:
return (new_price - current_price) * 10**18 // current_price
return (current_price - new_price) * 10**18 // current_price

As seen above, there's no sufficient validation regarding price params. Notably, we need to check:

  • total_supply is no less than balance_of_self as well as above zero

  • last_profit_update is verified (valid against current timestamp)

  • full_profit_unlock_date is within the accepted limits

  • total_idle and total_debt are correct as their sum is equal to actual total assets

Impact

Invalid state of pool can lead to wrong prices and unexpected results over normal pool operations.

Recommendations

Add sufficient validation on the price params.

Updates

Lead Judging Commences

0xnevi Lead Judge 8 months ago
Submission Judgement Published
Invalidated
Reason: Out of scope
Assigned finding tags:

[invalid] finding-missing-proof-content-validation

- See [here]([https://github.com/CodeHawks-Contests/2025-03-curve?tab=readme-ov-file#blockhash-oracle)](https://github.com/CodeHawks-Contests/2025-03-curve?tab=readme-ov-file#blockhash-oracle) on how it is used to verify storage variable - All state roots and proofs must be verified by the OOS `StateProofVerifier` inherited as `Verifier` (where the price values and params are extracted), so there is no proof that manipulating timestamp/inputs can affect a price update - It is assumed that the OOS prover will provide accurate data and the OOS verifier will verify the prices/max unlock time to be within an appropriate bound/values - There is a account existance check in L96 of `ScrvusdVerifierV1.sol`, in which the params for price updates are extracted from

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!