Submitted by rbserver, also found by bigtone, atoko, crypticdefense, Breeje, cheatc0d3, DanielArmstrong, juancito, jesjupyter, and zraxx
Because the claim function does not have slippage controls for amount0 and amount1 returned by the pool.burn function call, the claim function call can suffer from price manipulation on the associated Uniswap v3 pool. If a price manipulation frontruns the claim transaction, the claimed token amounts can be much less than what they should be.
When calling the following claim function, there are no slippage controls for amount0 and amount1 returned by the pool.burn function call. This is unlike Uniswaps decreaseLiquidity function below that does execute require(amount0 >= params.amount0Min && amount1 >= params.amount1Min, 'Price slippage check'), where amount0 and amount1 are also returned by the pool.burn function call. Thus, if a price manipulation on the associated Uniswap v3 pool frontruns the claim transaction, amount0 and amount1 can be much less than what they should be when the claim transaction is executed, which would cause the investor to claim token amounts that are much less than what they should be.
https://github.com/code-423n4/2024-06-vultisig/blob/58ebda57ccf6a74bdef2b88eb18a62ec4ad46112/src/ILOPool.sol#L184-L261
https://github.com/Uniswap/v3-periphery/blob/main/contracts/NonfungiblePositionManager.sol#L257-L306
The claim function can be updated to include slippage controls for amount0 and amount1 returned by the pool.burn function call like what Uniswaps decreaseLiquidity function does.
Invalid Validation
0xsomeone (judge) commented:
jarvisnn (Vultisig) acknowledged and commented:
