QA Report

[code423n4]

Chainlink's latestRoundData might return stale or incorrect results

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-connext/blob/b4532655071566b33c41eac46e75be29b4a381ed/contracts/contracts/core/connext/helpers/ConnextPriceOracle.sol#L122-L140

Vulnerability details

https://github.com/code-423n4/2022-06-connext/blob/b4532655071566b33c41eac46e75be29b4a381ed/contracts/contracts/core/connext/helpers/ConnextPriceOracle.sol#L122-L140

function getPriceFromChainlink(address _tokenAddress) public view returns (uint256) {
    AggregatorV3Interface aggregator = aggregators[_tokenAddress];
    if (address(aggregator) != address(0)) {
      (, int256 answer, , , ) = aggregator.latestRoundData();

      // It's fine for price to be 0. We have two price feeds.
      if (answer == 0) {
        return 0;
      }

      // Extend the decimals to 1e18.
      uint256 retVal = uint256(answer);
      uint256 price = retVal.mul(10**(18 - uint256(aggregator.decimals())));

      return price;
    }

    return 0;
  }

On ConnextPriceOracle.sol, we are using latestRoundData, but there is no check if the return value indicates stale data. This could lead to stale prices according to the Chainlink documentation:

• https://docs.chain.link/docs/historical-price-data/#historical-rounds
• https://docs.chain.link/docs/faq/#how-can-i-check-if-the-answer-to-a-round-is-being-carried-over-from-a-previous-round

Recommendation

Consider adding missing checks for stale data.

For example:

(uint80 roundID, int256 answer, , uint256 timestamp, uint80 answeredInRound) = aggregator.latestRoundData();
require(answer > 0, "Chainlink price <= 0"); 
require(answeredInRound >= roundID, "Stale price");
require(timestamp != 0, "Round not complete");

[ecmendenhall]

Duplicate of #190

[jakekidd]

dup #190