search

code-423n4 / 2021-05-nftx-findings

1 stars 0 forks source link

Inconsistence use require() message #83

Closed code423n4 closed 3 years ago

code423n4 commented 3 years ago

Handle

JMukesh

Vulnerability details

Impact

user should know the reason why certain condition is getting failed, that's why message should be provided with require()

Proof of Concept

in same deposit () function, at one line require message is used

require(pool.stakingToken != address(0), "LPStaking: Nonexistent pool");

but in next line require message is not used

require(IERC20Upgradeable(pool.stakingToken).transferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), amount));

https://github.com/code-423n4/2021-05-nftx/blob/main/nftx-protocol-v2/contracts/solidity/NFTXLPStaking.sol#L118

Tools Used

Recommended Mitigation Steps