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

Bad source of randomness #662

Closed
c4-submissions opened this issue Nov 9, 2023 · 4 comments
Closed

Bad source of randomness #662

c4-submissions opened this issue Nov 9, 2023 · 4 comments
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-1901 unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards

Comments

@c4-submissions
Copy link
Contributor

Lines of code

https://github.com/code-423n4/2023-10-nextgen/blob/2467db02cc446374ab9154dde98f7e931d71584d/smart-contracts/XRandoms.sol#L41

Vulnerability details

Impact

Using block.number and block.timestamp as a source of randomness is commonly advised against, as the outcome can be manipulated by calling contracts. In this case,minter can get the word he like

Proof of Concept

This code get random by block.number and block.timestamp

    function randomWord() public view returns (string memory) {
@>        uint256 randomNum = uint(keccak256(abi.encodePacked(block.prevrandao, blockhash(block.number - 1), block.timestamp))) % 100;
        return getWord(randomNum);
    }

Malicious user is able to predict result and get the word nft he want

Tools Used

manual

Recommended Mitigation Steps

Consider using a decentralized oracle for the generation of random numbers, such as Chainlinks VRF.

Assessed type

Other

@c4-submissions c4-submissions 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 Nov 9, 2023
c4-submissions added a commit that referenced this issue Nov 9, 2023
@c4-pre-sort
Copy link

141345 marked the issue as duplicate of #163

@c4-judge
Copy link

c4-judge commented Dec 4, 2023

alex-ppg marked the issue as duplicate of #1901

@c4-judge
Copy link

c4-judge commented Dec 5, 2023

alex-ppg marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Invalid

@c4-judge c4-judge added the unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards label Dec 5, 2023
@c4-judge
Copy link

c4-judge commented Dec 5, 2023

alex-ppg marked the issue as unsatisfactory:
Invalid

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-1901 unsatisfactory does not satisfy C4 submission criteria; not eligible for awards
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants