OrderBook
First Flight #43
Beginner FriendlySolidity
100 EXP
View results
Previous Next
Submission Details
Impact: low
Likelihood: low
Invalid

L-01. Centralization Risk Due to Privileged Owner Functions

0xriz0

Root + Impact

  • Centralization Risk + Excessive Owner Privileges

Description

  • The OrderBook contract is designed to facilitate decentralized trading operations where users can place buy and sell orders with minimal trust assumptions.

  • The contract owner has excessive privileged access including the ability to control allowed tokens, perform emergency withdrawals of user funds, and withdraw collected fees, creating significant centralization risks.

contract OrderBook is Ownable {
// ...
function setAllowedSellToken(address _token, bool _isAllowed) external onlyOwner {
// @> Owner can arbitrarily disable tokens, potentially trapping user funds
allowedSellTokens[_token] = _isAllowed;
emit AllowedSellTokenUpdated(_token, _isAllowed);
}
​
function emergencyWithdrawERC20(address _tokenAddress, uint256 _amount, address _to) external onlyOwner {
// @> Owner can withdraw any ERC20 tokens from the contract, including user deposits
IERC20(_tokenAddress).transfer(_to, _amount);
emit EmergencyWithdrawERC20(_tokenAddress, _amount, _to);
}
​
function withdrawFees(address _to) external onlyOwner {
// @> Owner controls all fee withdrawals
payable(_to).transfer(address(this).balance);
emit FeesWithdrawn(_to, address(this).balance);
}
}

Risk

Likelihood:

  • Owner key compromise occurs regularly in DeFi protocols due to phishing, social engineering, or operational security failures

  • Malicious or compromised owner actions can happen at any time without user consent or advance notice

Impact:

  • Users lose trust in the protocol due to centralization concerns, reducing adoption and liquidity

  • Owner can disable token trading by setting allowedSellTokens[token] = false, potentially trapping user funds in active orders

  • Emergency withdrawal function allows owner to drain any ERC20 tokens from the contract, including user deposits

  • Fee withdrawal centralization prevents transparent and automated fee distribution mechanisms

POC

  • N/A (Low Finding - self explanatory)

Recommended Mitigation

The centralization risks can be mitigated through several mechanisms that distribute control and add transparency:

+ // Implement multi-signature wallet for owner functions
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

yeahchibyke Lead Judge 9 days ago
Submission Judgement Published
Invalidated
Reason: Design choice

Support

FAQs

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