Puppy Raffle

AI First Flight #1
Beginner FriendlyFoundrySolidityNFT
EXP
View results
Submission Details
Severity: high
Valid

Overflow/Underflow vulnerability for any version before 0.8.0

Title: Overflow/Underflow vulnerability for any version before 0.8.0
Impact: High — Multiple arithmetic operations silently overflow.
Likelihood: High — entranceFee × playerCount combos trigger it.
Reference Files: src/PuppyRaffle.sol:2,80,131-134

Description:

Description

Solidity 0.7.6 lacks built-in overflow protection. Every multiplication and addition in the contract is vulnerable to silent wrapping. The vulnerable operations:

require(msg.value == entranceFee * newPlayers.length, "Must send enough");
uint256 totalAmountCollected = players.length * entranceFee;
uint256 prizePool = (totalAmountCollected * 80) / 100;
uint256 fee = (totalAmountCollected * 20) / 100;
totalFees = totalFees + uint64(fee);

Any of these multiplications can overflow, producing incorrect values that pass silently.

Risk

Impact: High. Overflow on entranceFee * newPlayers.length lets attackers enter for near-zero payment. Prize and fee calculations also overflow, distributing wrong amounts.
Likelihood: High. An attacker chooses entranceFee and newPlayers.length to trigger overflow. No exploit needed — some combinations overflow in normal usage.
With entranceFee = type(uint256).max / 2 + 1 and 2 players, the multiplication wraps to 1 wei.

Proof of Concept

function testEntranceFeeOverflow() public {
uint256 fee = type(uint256).max / 2 + 1;
puppyRaffle = new PuppyRaffle(fee, feeAddress, duration);
address[] memory p = new address[](2);
p[0] = address(1); p[1] = address(2);
puppyRaffle.enterRaffle{value: 0}(p); // overflow: pays 0 wei
}

The attacker enters 2 players for free because the multiplication wraps to a value near zero.

Recommended Mitigation

Upgrade to Solidity >=0.8.0 which has built-in overflow checks, or use SafeMath everywhere:

import "@openzeppelin/contracts/math/SafeMath.sol";
using SafeMath for uint256;
uint256 totalEntranceFee = newPlayers.length.mul(entranceFee);
require(msg.value == totalEntranceFee, "Insufficient payment");

SafeMath reverts on overflow instead of silently wrapping, preventing all overflow-based attacks.

Updates

Lead Judging Commences

ai-first-flight-judge Lead Judge about 4 hours ago
Submission Judgement Published
Validated
Assigned finding tags:

[H-06] Overflow/Underflow vulnerabilty for any version before 0.8.0

## Description The PuppyRaffle.sol uses Solidity compiler version 0.7.6. Any Solidity version before 0.8.0 is prone to Overflow/Underflow vulnerability. Short example - a `uint8 x;` can hold 256 values (from 0 - 255). If the calculation results in `x` variable to get 260 as value, the extra part will overflow and we will end up with 5 as a result instead of the expected 260 (because 260-255 = 5). ## Vulnerability Details I have two example below to demonstrate the problem of overflow and underflow with versions before 0.8.0, and how to fix it using safemath: Without `SafeMath`: ``` function withoutSafeMath() external pure returns (uint256 fee){ uint8 totalAmountCollected = 20; fee = (totalAmountCollected * 20) / 100; return fee; } // fee: 1 // WRONG!!! ``` In the above code,`without safeMath`, 20x20 (totalAmountCollected \* 20) was 400, but 400 is beyond the limit of uint8, so after going to 255, it went back to 0 and started counting from there. So, 400-255 = 145. 145 was the result of 20x20 in this code. And after dividing it by 100, we got 1.45, which the code showed as 1. With `SafeMath`: ``` function withSafeMath() external pure returns (uint256 fee){ uint8 totalAmountCollected = 20; fee = totalAmountCollected.mul(20).div(100); return fee; } // fee: 4 // CORRECT!!!! ``` This code didnt suffer from Overflow problem. Because of the safeMath, it was able to calculate 20x20 as 400, and then divided it by 100, to get 4 as result. ## Impact Depending on the bits assigned to a variable, and depending on whether the value assigned goes above or below a certain threshold, the code could end up giving unexpected results. This unexpected OVERFLOW and UNDERFLOW will result in unexpected and wrong calculations, which in turn will result in wrong data being used and presented to the users. ## Recommendations Modify the code to include SafeMath: 1. First import SafeMath from openzeppelin: ``` import "@openzeppelin/contracts/math/SafeMath.sol"; ``` 2. then add the following line, inside PuppyRaffle Contract: ``` using SafeMath for uint256; ``` (can also add safemath for uint8, uint16, etc as per need) 3. Then modify the `require` inside `enterRaffle() function`: ```diff - require(msg.value == entranceFee * newPlayers.length, "PuppyRaffle: Must send enough to enter raffle"); + uint256 totalEntranceFee = newPlayers.length.mul(entranceFee); + require(msg.value == totalEntranceFee, "PuppyRaffle: Must send enough to enter raffle"); ``` 3. Then modify variables (`totalAmountCollected`, `prizePool`, `fee`, and `totalFees`) inside `selectWinner()` function: ```diff - uint256 totalAmountCollected = players.length * entranceFee; + uint256 totalAmountCollected = players.length.mul(entranceFee); - uint256 prizePool = (totalAmountCollected * 80) / 100; + uint256 prizePool = totalAmountCollected.mul(80).div(100); - uint256 fee = (totalAmountCollected * 20) / 100; + uint256 fee = totalAmountCollected.mul(20).div(100); - totalFees = totalFees + uint64(fee); + totalFees = totalFees.add(fee); ``` This way, the code is now safe from Overflow/Underflow vulnerabilities.

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!