Smart Contract Security Audit Report
Produced by: BevorAI Agent
š Disclaimer: This report is generated by the BevorAI Agent, an experimental AI-based auditing tool. While every effort is made to ensure accuracy, this report should not replace a professional, human audit.
ā ļø Severity Level Definitions
- Critical: šØ Issues that can lead to contract compromise or significant financial losses.
- High: š“ Severe bugs that may result in major exploits or disruptions.
- Medium: š Moderate risks with potential functional or security impacts.
- Low: š¢ Minor issues with limited risk or impact.
š Audit Summary
- Contract Address: None
- Audit Date: 2025-03-19
- Auditor: BevorAI Agent
š§ Introduction
The SplitWithLockup
contract is designed to manage deposits and claims of tokens with specific lockup periods and conditions. It allows users to deposit tokens, claim them after certain conditions are met, and manage permissions for claims through signatures.
š Audit Scope
The audit focused on identifying vulnerabilities related to access control, control flow, data handling, economic vulnerabilities, and unsafe logic within the SplitWithLockup
smart contract.
š Findings
šØ Critical
None Identified
š“ High
Insufficient Access Control in setCanClaim
- Explanation: The
setCanClaim
function allows any user to set the claim status for any recipient. If an attacker can generate a valid signature, they could manipulate the canClaim
mapping for any recipient, allowing them to claim funds that do not belong to them.
- Recommendation: Restrict the
setCanClaim
function to only be callable by the owner or implement a more secure signature verification process that ensures the recipient is the one setting their own claim status.
- Code Reference: function setCanClaim(address recipient, bool status, uint8 v, bytes32 r, bytes32 s) public { ... }
DoS with Block Gas Limit
- Explanation: The
batchDeposit
, batchClaim
, and batchReclaim
functions iterate over arrays and perform operations for each element. If the input arrays are large, they could exceed the block gas limit, causing the transaction to fail.
- Recommendation: Consider limiting the size of the input arrays or implementing a mechanism to process them in smaller batches.
- Code Reference: function batchDeposit(...) { ... }
Transaction-Ordering Dependence
- Explanation: The
claim
function depends on the state of the deposits. If an attacker can manipulate the order of transactions, they could potentially claim or reclaim deposits before legitimate users.
- Recommendation: Implement a mechanism to ensure that claims are processed in a fair manner to mitigate this risk.
- Code Reference: function claim(...) { ... }
š Medium
Unchecked Return Value in deposit
function
- Explanation: The
safeTransferFrom
function is called without checking if the transfer was successful. If the transfer fails, it could lead to unexpected behavior since the deposit would still be recorded in the contract state, but the funds would not have been transferred.
- Recommendation: Ensure that the
safeTransferFrom
function either reverts on failure or check its return value if it does not revert.
- Code Reference: param.token.safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), param.amount);
Write to Arbitrary Storage Location in setCanClaim
- Explanation: The
recipientNonces
mapping is incremented without checks to ensure that the recipient
address is valid. If an invalid address is passed, it could lead to unintended behavior.
- Recommendation: Add a check to ensure that the
recipient
address is not the zero address before incrementing the nonce.
- Code Reference: recipientNonces[recipient]++;
Unbounded Return Data in getWhitelistedTokens
- Explanation: The function creates an array of addresses based on the length of
_whitelistedTokens
, which could lead to excessive gas consumption or out-of-gas errors if the number of whitelisted tokens is very large.
- Recommendation: Consider implementing pagination or a limit on the number of tokens that can be whitelisted to prevent excessive gas usage.
- Code Reference: function getWhitelistedTokens(...) { ... }
Weak Sources of Randomness from Chain Attributes
- Explanation: The contract uses
block.timestamp
for setting claim deadlines and validating claims, which can be manipulated by miners.
- Recommendation: Consider using a more reliable source of randomness or implement a mechanism to prevent manipulation.
- Code Reference: function claim(...) { ... }
š¢ Low
Off-by-One Error in deposit
and batchDeposit
functions
- Explanation: The
depositCount
is incremented after the deposit is created, leading to a mismatch between the expected deposit ID and the actual ID returned.
- Recommendation: Change the return statement in the
deposit
function to return depositCount
before incrementing it to avoid confusion.
- Code Reference: function deposit(...) { ... }
ā
Conclusion
The audit of the SplitWithLockup
contract revealed several vulnerabilities primarily related to access control, control flow, and data handling. While the contract has mechanisms in place for managing deposits and claims, it is crucial to address the identified vulnerabilities to enhance security and reliability. Recommendations include implementing stricter access control measures, improving signature verification processes, and ensuring that each signature is unique and non-reusable.