While we've outlined specific 'In Scope' and 'Out of Scope' areas, if you discover a vulnerability that doesn't clearly fit into these categories, we encourage you to submit it following the Program Rules. Your submission will be carefully reviewed and triaged accordingly.
IN SCOPE: SMART CONTRACT VULNERABILITIES
We are looking for evidence and reasons for incorrect behavior of the smart contract, which could cause unintended functionality:
Critical
- Stealing or loss of funds
- Staked funds
- Rewards distributed to the contract
- Unclaimed rewards earned by stakers
- Unauthorized transaction(s)
- Calling privileged functions bound to the owner
- Bypassing access controls to alter staking parameters
- Transferring staked funds without proper authorization
- Performing an emergency withdrawal
- Permanent freezing
- Staked funds
- Rewards distributed to the contract
- Unclaimed rewards earned by stakers
High
- Temporary freezing
- Staked funds
- Rewards distributed to the contract
- Unclaimed rewards earned by stakers
Medium
- Griefing or malicious disruption
OUT OF SCOPE: SMART CONTRACT VULNERABILITIES
We are excluding issues that do not directly impact the intended functionality of the smart contract or do not demonstrate a practical, real-world vulnerability. This includes theoretical concerns, issues related to non-critical aspects of the contract, or vulnerabilities in external dependencies that fall outside our direct control.
Conceptual
- Theoretical vulnerabilities without practical proof or demonstration.
- Vulnerabilities in our staking contract that do not demonstrate a direct impact within the specified scope.
Build and Code Quality
- Use of an old compiler version.
- Lack of compiler version locking.
- Vulnerabilities in imported contracts.
- Code style guide violations.
- Presence of redundant or unused code.
- Issues found in test files or configuration files.
- Vulnerabilities specifically related to the OpenZeppelin proxy implementation or contract upgrades.
Feature-Specific
- Gas optimizations.
- Best practice recommendations.
- Feature requests or suggestions for improvement.
- Issues related to the triggering of withdrawals, as long as funds reach the correct address.
Permissions & Roles
- Impacts caused by attacks requiring access to leaked keys or credentials.
- Impacts caused by attacks requiring access to privileged roles (e.g., owner, admin), except in cases where the contracts are explicitly designed to have no privileged access.
- Assumptions that trusted roles like Owner or Admin will behave maliciously. Reports based on these assumptions will be considered invalid.
Network and External Factors
- Incorrect data supplied by third-party oracles.
- Impacts requiring basic economic or governance attacks (e.g., 51% attack).
- Impacts involving centralization risks.
- Sybil attacks or other similar non-contract-specific exploits.
Miscellaneous
- Known issues that have already been publicly disclosed or self-reported.
- Issues related to the OpenZeppelin proxy contract itself, rather than the custom logic implemented in the staking contract.
- Any issues described in previous security audit reports.
Known issues
- Please be aware that the Layer3 team actively monitors and addresses vulnerabilities across all assets internally and across platforms. If you report an issue that is already known to us, it will be marked as a duplicate and closed. We kindly ask for your understanding in respecting our final decision and refraining from further negotiations once a decision has been made.
- The parameter swap issue on the function
withdrawERC1155 is a known issue.