Daily Security
رفتن به کانال در Telegram
4 066
مشترکین
-224 ساعت
-57 روز
-1830 روز
آرشیو پست ها
4 067
Audit checklists for CDP( Collaterized Debt Positions)
Give it a star🙏
https://github.com/Decurity/audit-checklists/blob/master/cdp.md
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
Heads up! Some Curve ETH pools have a major bug that allows an attacker to manipulate the virtual_price.
https://twitter.com/danielvf/status/1657019677544001536?s=19
@EthSecurity1
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
If you see a Solidity method that has an argument of type array, always check for 3 things:
1. What if the array length is 0?
2. What if there are duplicated elements in the array?
3. What if there are zero value elements in the array?
@EthSecurity1
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
Web3 Dev
1)How do you construct a lending protocol that supports arbitrary collateral, has no oracles, and has no expirations?
Read the whitepaper to find out:
paradigm.xyz/2023/05/blend
2) Web3education.dev brought by patrick collins
@EthSecurity1
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
Are you familiar with the challenges borrowing and lending protocols face?
#web3sec #defi
Dive into:
- Illiquid liquidations
- Collateral Safeness
- The dangers of governance
- Oracle risk and cost of manipulation
https://tokeninsight.com/en/research/market-analysis/the-7-deadly-sins-of-lending-protocols
@EthSecurity1
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
nonReentrant modifiers might potentially cause a DoS attack.
https://medium.com/@bloqarl/uncovering-real-life-examples-of-denial-of-service-attacks-on-smart-contracts-8bc220c2cdd0
@EthSecurity1
4 067
Vulnerable spots of Lending/Borrowing protocols
https://mixbytes.io/blog/vulnerable-spots-of-lending-protocols
https://dacian.me/lending-borrowing-defi-attacks
4 067
Repost from EthSecurity
🔴Many security vulnerabilities come from faulty assumptions
Identifying the assumptions made by the devs and evaluating if they are correct can uncover big discrepancies between what the code does vs what it is intended to do
Here are examples of common faulty assumptions: 📔
1. Initialization functions will only be called ONCE and/or can be called only by the contract deployer
2. Only admins can call certain functions(access control issues)
3. Functions will always be called in a certain order as expected by the system
Ex. what if there's a function that closes a position but expects that you opened one in the 1st place?
A function that checks if your payment is on time but expects you got a loan before that?
4. Parameters can only have non-zero values or values within a certain threshold
addresses will never be zero-valued
sender will always be different from the receiver
an element of a struct array will always exist so the values won't be the default ones
5. Certain addresses or data values can never be attacker-controlled
6. Function calls will always be successful and so checking for return values is not required
These are just a few examples of common assumptions that don't always hold true
Always try to identify what assumptions are made when writing the code and compare that to how the system could actually behave
@EthSecurity1
4 067
4 067
https://cointelegraph.com/news/how-to-avoid-front-runners-on-decentralized-crypto-exchanges
https://consensys.github.io/smart-contract-best-practices/attacks/frontrunning/
Optimal frontrunning attacks and how to stop them
https://youtu.be/BwkNQWM32y0
#EDUCATION
اکنون در دسترس! پژوهش تلگرام ۲۰۲۵ — مهمترین بینشهای سال 
