Submitted by 0xRajeev, also found by gpersoon, paulius.eth and shw
In the deposit function, the deposit _amount has already been added to the users deposit on L303. The addition of _amount again to the deposit on L309 for checking against daily bidRate effectively leads to double counting of deposited _amount and may keep/bring user out of foreclosure even though they are not.
Scenario: Alices current daily bidRate is 500 and deposit is 350. She makes a new deposit of 100 which should not bring her out of foreclosure because the new effective deposit will be 300+150 = 450 which is still less than 500. However, because of the double-counting miscalculation, the check performed is 450+100 > 500 which will pass and Alice is not foreclosed. She effectively gains double the deposit amount in treatment of deposits against foreclosure.
Recommend changing the conditional predicate on L309-310 from:
user[_user].deposit + _amount > user[_user].bidRate / minRentalDayDivisor
to:
user[_user].deposit > user[_user].bidRate / minRentalDayDivisor
Splidge (Reality Cards) disagreed with severity:
dmvt (Judge) lowered risk from 2 to 1:
Splidge (Reality Cards) confirmed and resolved in a separate issue:
 Note: Additional conversation regarding this vulnerability can be found here
