Santa's List

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

checkList lacks onlySanta modifier enabling anyone to manipulate status

Title: checkList lacks onlySanta modifier enabling anyone to manipulate status
Severity: High
Impact: Any address can set statuses for any person, sabotaging Santa's two-phase checking system.
Likelihood: High — zero access control, single transaction, front-runnable on mempool.
Reference Files: src/SantasList.sol:121-124

Description

checkList has no access control despite the comment stating "Only callable by santa." Any caller modifies s_theListCheckedOnce freely, while checkTwice correctly uses onlySanta. The vulnerable code:

function checkList(address person, Status status) external {
s_theListCheckedOnce[person] = status;
}
function checkTwice(address person, Status status) external onlySanta {
if (s_theListCheckedOnce[person] != status) {
revert SantasList__SecondCheckDoesntMatchFirst();
}
s_theListCheckedTwice[person] = status;
}

An attacker front-running Santa sets any victim's first check to NAUGHTY, causing Santa's honest checkTwice(victim, NICE) to revert permanently.

Risk

Impact: High. Attacker sets victim's first check to NAUGHTY, Santa's checkTwice for NICE reverts with SecondCheckDoesntMatchFirst. Victim permanently blocked from presents.
Likelihood: High. Any address calls checkList(victim, NAUGHTY) in one transaction, no restrictions.
An attacker monitoring the mempool can front-run every Santa checkTwice transaction, silently DoS-ing the entire nice list.

Proof of Concept

function testAnyoneCanSpoofCheckList() public {
address attacker = makeAddr("attacker");
vm.prank(attacker);
santasList.checkList(user, SantasList.Status.NAUGHTY);
vm.prank(santa);
vm.expectRevert(SantasList.SantasList__SecondCheckDoesntMatchFirst.selector);
santasList.checkTwice(user, SantasList.Status.NICE);
}

This test proves any address can sabotage a victim's status, making Santa's approval revert.

Recommended Mitigation

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

Adding onlySanta matches the documented access control and checkTwice's pattern, restricting status assignment to Santa only.

Updates

Lead Judging Commences

ai-first-flight-judge Lead Judge about 2 hours 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!