Santa's List

AI First Flight #3
Beginner FriendlyFoundry
EXP
View results
Submission Details
Severity: high
Valid

Missing access control on `checkList` lets anyone corrupt Santa's first list

[M-01] Missing access control on checkList lets anyone corrupt Santa's first list

Severity

Medium

Description

The README states that only Santa should be able to call both list-checking functions. checkTwice() correctly uses onlySanta, but checkList() is public to every address:

function checkList(address person, Status status) external {
s_theListCheckedOnce[person] = status;
emit CheckedOnce(person, status);
}

collectPresent() requires the first and second checks to both be NICE or both be EXTRA_NICE. Because the first list remains publicly writable, an attacker can change an already-approved user's first status after Santa has checked the user twice.

Affected code:

  • src/SantasList.sol:121-124

  • src/SantasList.sol:133-138

  • src/SantasList.sol:154-165

Risk

An attacker can change an eligible user's first-check status to NAUGHTY or any mismatching value. The victim then fails the final eligibility check and cannot collect their present.

This breaks the integrity of Santa's list and creates a public griefing vector against any eligible recipient.

Impact

Medium.

Eligible users can be denied their NFT and, for EXTRA_NICE users, their SantaToken reward. The protocol's list state can no longer be trusted because non-Santa callers can alter one of the two required eligibility records.

Likelihood

High.

The vulnerable function is external and has no access control. Any address can call checkList(user, status) at any time, including after Santa has already completed both checks.

Proof of Concept

The exploit is covered by test_AnyoneCanChangeCheckedOnceAndBlockEligibleUser in test/unit/SantasListTest.t.sol.

function test_AnyoneCanChangeCheckedOnceAndBlockEligibleUser() public {
address attacker = makeAddr("attacker");
vm.startPrank(santa);
santasList.checkList(user, SantasList.Status.NICE);
santasList.checkTwice(user, SantasList.Status.NICE);
vm.stopPrank();
vm.prank(attacker);
santasList.checkList(user, SantasList.Status.NAUGHTY);
vm.warp(santasList.CHRISTMAS_2023_BLOCK_TIME() + 1);
vm.prank(user);
vm.expectRevert(SantasList.SantasList__NotNice.selector);
santasList.collectPresent();
}

Run:

forge test --match-test test_AnyoneCanChangeCheckedOnceAndBlockEligibleUser -vvv

Result:

[PASS] test_AnyoneCanChangeCheckedOnceAndBlockEligibleUser()

The user was checked as NICE twice by Santa, but an arbitrary attacker changed the first list afterward and blocked collection.

Mitigation

Apply onlySanta to checkList():

function checkList(address person, Status status) external onlySanta {
s_theListCheckedOnce[person] = status;
emit CheckedOnce(person, status);
}

Add a regression test that a non-Santa caller cannot call checkList().

Updates

Lead Judging Commences

ai-first-flight-judge Lead Judge about 1 hour ago
Submission Judgement Published
Validated
Assigned finding tags:

[H-01] Anyone is able to call `checkList` function in SantasList contract and prevent any address from becoming `NICE` or `EXTRA_NICE` and collect present.

## Description With the current design of the protocol, anyone is able to call `checkList` function in SantasList contract, while documentation says only Santa should be able to call it. This can be considered as an access control vulnerability, because not only santa is allowed to make the first check. ## Vulnerability Details An attacker could simply call the external `checkList` function, passing as parameter the address of someone else and the enum Status `NAUGHTY`(or `NOT_CHECKED_TWICE`, which should actually be `UNKNOWN` given documentation). By doing that, Santa will not be able to execute `checkTwice` function correctly for `NICE` and `EXTRA_NICE` people. Indeed, if Santa first checked a user and assigned the status `NICE` or `EXTRA_NICE`, anyone is able to call `checkList` function again, and by doing so modify the status. This could result in Santa unable to execute the second check. Moreover, any malicious actor could check the mempool and front run Santa just before calling `checkTwice` function to check users. This would result in a major denial of service issue. ## Impact The impact of this vulnerability is HIGH as it results in a broken mechanism of the check list system. Any user could be declared `NAUGHTY` for the first check at any time, preventing present collecting by users although Santa considered the user as `NICE` or `EXTRA_NICE`. Santa could still call `checkList` function again to reassigned the status to `NICE` or `EXTRA_NICE` before calling `checkTwice` function, but any malicious actor could front run the call to `checkTwice` function. In this scenario, it would be impossible for Santa to actually double check a `NICE` or `EXTRA_NICE` user. ## Proof of Concept Just copy paste this test in SantasListTest contract : ``` function testDosAttack() external { vm.startPrank(makeAddr("attacker")); // any user can checList any address and assigned status to naughty // an attacker could front run Santa before the second check santasList.checkList(makeAddr("user"), SantasList.Status.NAUGHTY); vm.stopPrank(); vm.startPrank(santa); vm.expectRevert(); // Santa is unable to check twice the user santasList.checkTwice(makeAddr("user"), SantasList.Status.NICE); vm.stopPrank(); } ``` ## Recommendations I suggest to add the `onlySanta` modifier to `checkList` function. This will ensure the first check can only be done by Santa, and prevent DOS attack on the contract. With this modifier, specification will be respected : "In this contract Only Santa to take the following actions: - checkList: A function that changes an address to a new Status of NICE, EXTRA_NICE, NAUGHTY, or UNKNOWN on the original s_theListCheckedOnce list." The following code will resolve this access control issue, simply by adding `onlySanta` modifier: ``` function checkList(address person, Status status) external onlySanta { s_theListCheckedOnce[person] = status; emit CheckedOnce(person, status); } ``` No malicious actor is now able to front run Santa before `checkTwice` function call. The following tests shows that doing the first check for another user is impossible after adding `onlySanta` modifier: ``` function testDosResolved() external { vm.startPrank(makeAddr("attacker")); // checklist function call will revert if a user tries to execute the first check for another user vm.expectRevert(SantasList.SantasList__NotSanta.selector); santasList.checkList(makeAddr("user"), SantasList.Status.NAUGHTY); vm.stopPrank(); } ```

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!