MyCut

AI First Flight #8
Beginner FriendlyFoundry
EXP
View results
Submission Details
Severity: high
Valid

The settlement divides by the number of players instead of claimants, permanently stranding the undistributed remainder

Root + Impact

Description

The settlement divides the remaining pool by the total number of players instead of the number of players who actually claimed.

function closePot() external onlyOwner {
...
if (remainingRewards > 0) {
uint256 managerCut = remainingRewards / managerCutPercent;
i_token.transfer(msg.sender, managerCut);
​
@> uint256 claimantCut = (remainingRewards - managerCut) / i_players.length;
for (uint256 i = 0; i < claimants.length; i++) {
_transferReward(claimants[i], claimantCut);
}
}
}

The loop pays claimants.length recipients, but the share is computed with i_players.length, which is always greater than or equal to claimants.length and is usually strictly greater. The undistributed remainder is never transferred and there is no sweep or rescue function, so it stays in the contract permanently.

The amount lost grows with the dropout rate: the fewer players claim, the larger the fraction of the pool that is never paid out. With one claimant out of four, three quarters of the settlement share is stranded.

Risk

Likelihood: High. Every settlement where at least one player does not claim before the deadline triggers it, and missing the 90-day window is the normal case this settlement exists to handle.

Impact: Medium. Contest rewards are permanently locked in the Pot contract with no withdrawal path. The manager receives a cut computed from the full remaining pool while the claimants receive a fraction of the rest, so the loss falls entirely on the participants the settlement is meant to compensate.

Proof of Concept

Two players with 500 each, pool of 1000. One player claims, the contest is closed, and the second player's share is divided by two but paid to only one claimant, leaving the difference stuck in the pot with no way out.

// Actors:
// - p1: claimed before the deadline
// - p2: did not claim
// - Manager: triggers the settlement
​
function test_poc_stranded_funds() public {
vm.prank(p1);
Pot(contest).claimCut(); // p1 takes 500, remainingRewards = 500
​
vm.warp(block.timestamp + 91 days);
ContestManager(mgr).closeContest(contest);
​
uint256 left = token.balanceOf(contest);
assertGt(left, 0, "funds left with no way to withdraw"); // 225 stranded
assertEq(Pot(contest).getRemainingRewards(), 500); // accounting never updated
}

Logged value: 225 tokens remain in the pot after the settlement. Repeating the settlement runs into the balance limit, so the remainder is not recoverable through the same path either.

Recommended Mitigation

Divide by the number of claimants and pay the remainder to them, then record that the pot is settled so nothing is left attributable to the contract.

+ uint256 internal constant BPS = 10_000;
+
function closePot() external onlyOwner {
...
if (remainingRewards > 0) {
- uint256 managerCut = remainingRewards / managerCutPercent;
+ uint256 managerCut = (remainingRewards * managerCutPercent) / 100;
i_token.transfer(msg.sender, managerCut);
​
- uint256 claimantCut = (remainingRewards - managerCut) / i_players.length;
+ uint256 pool = remainingRewards - managerCut;
+ uint256 claimantCut = pool / claimants.length;
+ remainingRewards = 0;
for (uint256 i = 0; i < claimants.length; i++) {
_transferReward(claimants[i], claimantCut);
}
+ // dust from integer division stays with the last claimant
+ uint256 dust = pool - claimantCut * claimants.length;
+ if (dust > 0) _transferReward(claimants[claimants.length - 1], dust);
}
}
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

ai-first-flight-judge Lead Judge 10 minutes ago
Submission Judgement Published
Validated
Assigned finding tags:

[H-02] Incorrect logic in `Pot::closePot` leads to unfair distribution to `claimants`, potentially locking the funds with no way to take that out

## Description in `closePot` function while calclulating the shares for claimaint cut, `i_players.length` is used, instead of `claimants.length`, causing low amount being distributed to claimants. ## Vulnerability Details [2024-08-MyCut/src/Pot.sol at main · Cyfrin/2024-08-MyCut (github.com)](https://github.com/Cyfrin/2024-08-MyCut/blob/main/src/Pot.sol#L57) `Pot::closePot` function is meant to be called once contest passed 90 days, it sends the owner cut to owner and rest is splitted among the users who claimed b/w 90 days period. However, current implementation is wrong.&#x20; It uses total users (i_players.length) instead of the users (claimants.length) who claimed during the duration. This creates an unfair distribution to the participants and some of the funds could be locked in the contract. In worst case scenerio, it could be 90% if nobody has claimed from the protocol during the 90 days duration. ## POC In existing test suite, add following test: ```solidity function testUnfairDistributionInClosePot() public mintAndApproveTokens { // Setup address[] memory testPlayers = new address[](3); testPlayers[0] = makeAddr("player1"); testPlayers[1] = makeAddr("player2"); testPlayers[2] = makeAddr("player3"); uint256[] memory testRewards = new uint256[](3); testRewards[0] = 400; testRewards[1] = 300; testRewards[2] = 300; uint256 testTotalRewards = 1000; // Create and fund the contest vm.startPrank(user); address testContest = ContestManager(conMan).createContest( testPlayers, testRewards, IERC20(ERC20Mock(weth)), testTotalRewards ); ContestManager(conMan).fundContest(0); vm.stopPrank(); // Only player1 claims their reward vm.prank(testPlayers[0]); Pot(testContest).claimCut(); // Fast forward 91 days vm.warp(block.timestamp + 91 days); // Record balances before closing the pot uint256 player1BalanceBefore = ERC20Mock(weth).balanceOf( testPlayers[0] ); // Close the contest vm.prank(user); ContestManager(conMan).closeContest(testContest); // Check balances after closing the pot uint256 player1BalanceAfter = ERC20Mock(weth).balanceOf(testPlayers[0]); // Calculate expected distributions uint256 remainingRewards = 600; // 300 + 300 unclaimed rewards uint256 ownerCut = remainingRewards / 10; // 10% of remaining rewards uint256 distributionPerPlayer = (remainingRewards - ownerCut) / 1; // as only 1 user claimed uint256 fundStucked = ERC20Mock(weth).balanceOf(address(testContest)); // actual results console.log("expected reward:", distributionPerPlayer); console.log( "actual reward:", player1BalanceAfter - player1BalanceBefore ); console.log("Fund stucked:", fundStucked); } ``` then run `forge test --mt testUnfairDistributionInClosePot -vv` in the terminal and it will show following output: ```js [⠊] Compiling... [⠒] Compiling 1 files with Solc 0.8.20 [⠘] Solc 0.8.20 finished in 1.63s Compiler run successful! Ran 1 test for test/TestMyCut.t.sol:TestMyCut [PASS] testUnfairDistributionInClosePot() (gas: 905951) Logs: User Address: 0x6CA6d1e2D5347Bfab1d91e883F1915560e09129D Contest Manager Address 1: 0x7BD1119CEC127eeCDBa5DCA7d1Bd59986f6d7353 Minting tokens to: 0x6CA6d1e2D5347Bfab1d91e883F1915560e09129D Approved tokens to: 0x7BD1119CEC127eeCDBa5DCA7d1Bd59986f6d7353 expected reward: 540 actual reward: 180 Fund stucked: 360 Suite result: ok. 1 passed; 0 failed; 0 skipped; finished in 1.58ms (506.33µs CPU time) ``` ## Impact Loss of funds, Unfair distribution b/w users ## Recommendations Fix the functions as shown below: ```diff function closePot() external onlyOwner { if (block.timestamp - i_deployedAt < 90 days) { revert Pot__StillOpenForClaim(); } if (remainingRewards > 0) { uint256 managerCut = remainingRewards / managerCutPercent; i_token.transfer(msg.sender, managerCut); - uint256 claimantCut = (remainingRewards - managerCut) / i_players.length; + uint256 totalClaimants = claimants.length; + if(totalClaimant == 0){ + _transferReward(msg.sender, remainingRewards - managerCut); + } else { + uint256 claimantCut = (remainingRewards - managerCut) / claimants.length; for (uint256 i = 0; i < claimants.length; i++) { _transferReward(claimants[i], claimantCut); } } + } } ```

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!