Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

SHOULD CHECK RETURN DATA FROM CHAINLINK AGGREGATORS #28

Closed
code423n4 opened this issue Feb 19, 2022 · 1 comment
Closed

SHOULD CHECK RETURN DATA FROM CHAINLINK AGGREGATORS #28

code423n4 opened this issue Feb 19, 2022 · 1 comment
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists

Comments

@code423n4
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-02-hubble/blob/main/contracts/Oracle.sol#L33
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-02-hubble/blob/8c157f519bc32e552f8cc832ecc75dc381faa91e/contracts/MarginAccount.sol#L465
https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-02-hubble/blob/8c157f519bc32e552f8cc832ecc75dc381faa91e/contracts/MarginAccount.sol#L524

Vulnerability details

Impact

The getUnderlyingPrice function in the contract Oracle.sol fetches the asset price from a Chainlink aggregator using the latestRoundData function. However, there are no checks on roundID nor timeStamp, resulting in stale prices. The oracle wrapper calls out to a chainlink oracle receiving the latestRoundData(). It then checks freshness by verifying that the answer is indeed for the last known round. The returned updatedAt timestamp is not checked.

If there is a problem with chainlink starting a new round and finding consensus on the new value for the oracle (e.g. chainlink nodes abandon the oracle, chain congestion, vulnerability/attacks on the chainlink system) consumers of this contract may continue using outdated stale data (if oracles are unable to submit no new round is started)

Proof of Concept

  1. Navigate to the following contract.

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-02-hubble/blob/8c157f519bc32e552f8cc832ecc75dc381faa91e/contracts/MarginAccount.sol#L465

  1. getUnderlyingPrice function has been used without validation of the return data. Oracle contract has getUnderlyingTwapPrice but the above contract does not use it.

  2. Stale prices could put funds at risk. According to Chainlink's documentation, This function does not error if no answer has been reached but returns 0, causing an incorrect price fed to the PriceOracle. The external Chainlink oracle, which provides index price information to the system, introduces risk inherent to any dependency on third-party data sources. For example, the oracle could fall behind or otherwise fail to be maintained, resulting in outdated data being fed to the index price calculations of the AMM. Oracle reliance has historically resulted in crippled on-chain systems, and complications that lead to these outcomes can arise from things as simple as network congestion.

Medium Severity Issue From The FEI Protocol : https://consensys.net/diligence/audits/2021/09/fei-protocol-v2-phase-1/#chainlinkoraclewrapper-latestrounddata-might-return-stale-results

Tools Used

Code review

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Consider checking the oracle responses updatedAt value after calling out to chainlinkOracle.latestRoundData() verifying that the result is within an allowed margin of freshness.

(uint80 roundID, int256 price, , uint256 timeStamp, uint80 answeredInRound) = ETH_CHAINLINK.latestRoundData();
require(price > 0, "Chainlink price <= 0"); 
require(answeredInRound >= roundID, "...");
require(timeStamp != 0, "...");
@code423n4 code423n4 added 2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working labels Feb 19, 2022
code423n4 added a commit that referenced this issue Feb 19, 2022
@atvanguard
Copy link
Collaborator

Duplicate of #46

@atvanguard atvanguard marked this as a duplicate of #46 Feb 24, 2022
@atvanguard atvanguard added the duplicate This issue or pull request already exists label Feb 24, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
2 (Med Risk) Assets not at direct risk, but function/availability of the protocol could be impacted or leak value bug Something isn't working duplicate This issue or pull request already exists
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants