This project aims to provide a valuable resource for Web3 developers and security analysts by facilitating their understanding of exploitable bugs in smart contracts. We conduct a thorough analysis of exploitable bugs extracted from code4rena and classify each bug according to its nature.
Our initial research suggests that a notable proportion of exploitable bugs in smart contracts are functional bugs, which cannot be detected using simple and general oracles like reentrancy. We aim to raise awareness about the significance of such bugs and encourage practitioners to develop more sophisticated and nuanced automatic semantical oracles to detect them.
๐ฐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐ก๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ข ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐, ๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐๐.
Please be aware that this repository is currently undergoing active development, and the data may change over time due to ongoing code4rena contests.
The dataset is organized into four folders:
- papers/: contains our ICSE23 paper summarizing our preliminary results, as well as the supplementary material for the paper.
- results/: contains the bug classification in bugs.csv and the description for each contest in contests.csv.
- contracts/: contains all the smart contracts that we examined, using the version at the time of the contest.
- reports/: contains all the reports provided by code4rena.
We classify the surveyed bugs into three main categories based on their nature:
- Out-of-scope bugs (denoted by O)
- Bugs with simple and general testing oracles (denoted by L)
- Bugs that require high-level semantical oracles (denoted by S)
As classifying functional bugs can be ambiguous, we welcome suggestions to improve our classification standards. You can find more detailed label information in our documentation, and we encourage you to refer to our current classification guidelines for more information.
Our goal is to create a comprehensive list of vulnerability detection techniques that will be a valuable resource for Web3 developers and security analysts. We will focus on two main categories:
- Vunerability detection techniques that prioritize the development of semantical oracles for smart contracts.
- Publicly available security analysis tools that can be used for auditing
We warmly welcome any additional suggestions or contributions from the community to help expand and improve the list.
We believe that future web3 security efforts will prioritize identifying functional bugs and developing corresponding oracles. To this end, we intend to compile a list of techniques that provide guidance in the creation of automatic semantic oracles. These techniques will be sourced from various materials, such as peer-reviewed research papers, pre-prints, industry tools, and online resources.
| Technique | Bug Category |
|---|---|
| Finding Permission Bugs in Smart Contracts with Role Mining | Access Control |
| AChecker: Statically Detecting Smart Contract Access Control Vulnerabilities | Access Control |
| Clockwork Finance: Automated Analysis of Economic Security in Smart Contracts | TBD |
This section will include open-source techniques that are publicly available and currently in active development. These techniques can be used either directly by Web3 developers and security analysts or as building blocks for other tools. We give priority to source-code level techniques, which are better suited for Web3 development and auditing contexts.
| Technique | Developer(s) | Description | Security-related Keywords |
|---|---|---|---|
| Slither | Trail of Bits | Static Analysis Framework | Vulnerability Detectors, SlithIR |
| Foundry | Paradigm | Development Toolchain | Fuzzing, Stateful Fuzzing (Invariant Testing), Differential Testing |
| Echidna | Trail of Bits | Fuzzer | Fuzzing , Stateful Fuzzing (Invariant Testing), CI/CD |
| Optik | Trail of Bits | Hybrid Fuzzer (Symbolic Execution + Fuzzing) | Fuzzing, Stateful Fuzzing, Symbolic Execution |
| Woke | Ackee Blockchain | Development Toolchain | Cross-chain Testing, Invariant Testing, Vulnerability Detectors, IR |
| 4naly3er | Picodes | Static Scanner | Code4rena Pre-content Testing |
| Manticore | Trail of Bits | Symbolic Execution Tool | Symbolic Execution, Property Testing |
| Halmos | a16z | Symbolic Bounded Model Checker | Symbolic Execution, Bound Checker |
| Solidity SMTChecker | Ethereum Foundation | Formal Verification by Symbolic Exection | Solidity, Formal Verification, Symbolic Execution |
| Move Prover | The Move Programming Language | Formal Specification and Verification | Move, Formal Verification |
We welcome all types of contributions to our project, including but not limited to:
- Suggesting new reference techniques for smart contract security analysis.
- Adding newly disclosed code4rena contest bugs.
- Suggesting improvements to the classification standard
- Correcting mislabeled bugs
- Filling in any missing defillama entities in the
results/contests.csv
Further details can be found in our contribution guidelines.
- Zhuo Zhang, Brian Zhang, Wen Xu, Zhiqiang Lin, "Demystifying Exploitable Bugs in Smart Contracts." In Proceedings of the 45th International Conference on Software Engineering, 2023.
Please refer to our classification documentation.
We would like to extend our sincere thanks to code4rena for making this valuable information publicly available.
React
Typescript
Django
Laravel
Facebook
Microsoft
Google
Alibaba
D3
Tencent