When a seller lists an NFT with a minPrice, users expect to be able to place a first bid equal to that minimum price. However, the contract enforces the first bid with a strict inequality.
Because of the > operator, a bid equal to the listing’s minPrice will always revert. This breaks the “minimum price enforcement” guarantee stated in the project description, as the actual minimum is effectively minPrice + 1.
This creates user confusion and mismatched expectations between off-chain interfaces (UIs/marketplace frontends) and on-chain rules.
Likelihood: High
Every first bidder that tries to bid exactly the minimum price will fail.
Very likely to occur, as most users assume minPrice is inclusive.
Impact: Medium
Breaks protocol guarantees and can harm user trust.
Causes failed transactions and wasted gas.
May make auctions less attractive if bidders cannot bid at the listed minimum price.
The following test fails because bidding exactly minPrice is disallowed.Instead of accepting this as a valid bid, the contract reverts.
Change the first bid check to allow bids greater than or equal to the minimum price. This change will ensures that:
minPrice is truly the minimum valid bid.
User and frontend expectations align with protocol behavior.
Auction flow works as intended without unnecessary failed transactions.
First bid validation uses > instead of >=, preventing valid starting 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.