I like to push myself over my limits and always raise the bar of my knowledge and skills.
Recent engagements
ethereum-price-oracle
08 Apr 2024 - 20 May 2024
ethereum-vault-kit
08 Apr 2024 - 20 May 2024
ethereum-vault-connector
08 Apr 2024 - 10 May 2024
morpho-blue-oracles
19 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2024
morpho-blue-bundlers
19 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2024
morpho-blue-irm
19 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2024
public-allocator
19 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2024
morpho-blue-oracles adapters
19 Feb 2024 - 23 Feb 2024
morpho-blue-irm
28 Sep 2023 - 16 Oct 2023
ebtc
02 Aug 2023 - 11 Aug 2023
morpho-aave-v3
01 Jun 2023 - 07 Jun 2023
morpho-aave-v3
13 Feb 2023 - 24 Feb 2023
morpho-v1
21 Nov 2022 - 02 Dec 2022
Liquid Collective
07 Nov 2022 - 11 Nov 2022
Liquid Collective
29 Aug 2022 - 09 Sep 2022
Drippie
08 Aug 2022 - 17 Aug 2022
Art-Gobblers
04 Jul 2022 - 15 Jul 2022
Aera Contracts
02 May 2022 - 16 May 2022
morpho-contracts
15 Mar 2022 - 29 Mar 2022
Tracer Perpetual Pools
01 Feb 2022 - 14 Feb 2022
Security portfolio
Name | Description | |
|---|---|---|
Aave v3 bug bounty 3 ($20000 USD) | `LTV-0` `AToken` poison attack! | Read more |
Aave v3 bug bounty 2 ($10000 USD) | If the user is in e-mode (efficiency mode) it means that all the assets that have been supplied and borrowed belong to the same e-mode category of the user. During the liquidation process, Aave is making the wrong assumption that, if the user is in e-mode and the e-mode category has been configured with a custom oracle, both the collateral and debt asset are using the same e-mode category custom oracle. This assumption would be normally correct (if you are in e-mode you can only supply and borrow assets that are in the same e-mode category) but there are some specific edge cases where it would not be true. | Read more |
Aave v3 bug bounty 1 ($5000 USD) | When the user performs a flashloan action that ends up opening a borrowing position (instead of later repaying the flashloan), Aave is passing to the receiver the wrong amount of fees that the receiver needs to repay. In this specific case, the user does not have to repay any flashloan fees. While Aave is not requesting back those premiums, they anyway tell to the receiver that it have to approve more tokens that are needed (flash loan amount + wrongly calculated premium that should instead be equal to zero). Because of this, the receiver could end up over-approving the Aave protocol. For more detail about the consequences and all the possible side effects, keep reading the blog post because I'm going very deep into the woods 😁 | Read more |