Attacker can prevent distribution of rewards to stakers through frequent reward updates

Malicious User can dilute staking Rewards to a longer timeframe

The calculation of `totalAssets()` could be wrong if `operatorFeeAmount` > 0, this can cause potential loss for the new depositors

Users can claim more that their actual allotment

Users will be DoSed from claiming if they do multiple partial claims

There is no refund mechanism in `ChakraSettlement.processCrossChainCallback` or `ChakraSettlementHandler.receive_cross_chain_callback` function

Does not check if to_chain and to_handler is whitelisted in cross_chain_erc20_settlement

SettlementSignatureVerifier's required_validators is not updated, resulting in a low or high number of signatures being required

Malicious actor can abuse the minimum shares check in `StakingLPEth` and cause DoS or locked funds for the last user that withdraws

`claim` function lacks slippage controls for `amount0` and `amount1` returned by `pool.burn` function call

`OUSGInstantManager` will allow Excessive OUSG Token Minting During USDC Depeg Event

Users can lose access to funds due to minimum withdrawal limits.

Oracle price can be manipulated

Adjusting "_I_" will create a sandwich opportunity because of price changes

Holders array can be manipulated by transferring or burning with amount 0, stealing rewards or bricking certain functions

`LiquidInfrastructureERC20.sol` disapproved holders keep part of the supply, diluting approved holders revenue.

Withdrawal from NFTs can be temporarily blocked

Non-transferable `GameItems` can be transferred with `GameItems::safeBatchTransferFrom(...)`

Voting functionality will always revert

Incorrect decimal usage in score calculation leads to reduced user reward earnings

DoS and gas griefing of calls to Prime.updateScores()

`OUSGInstantManager` will allow Excessive OUSG Token Minting During USDC Depeg Event

Users can lose access to funds due to minimum withdrawal limits.

Malicious Lender can forcefully roll the loan on it's own terms

Malicious Lender can Frontrun `repay` transaction and potentially steal `debt` through price Slippage

No Slippage Protection while closing a position from Balancer pool and exiting the Aura farming

User can pay double amount in Vault Router and Excess amount can be stolen

Attacker can frontrun deployVault to deploy at the same address

TOFT and USDO Modules Can Be Selfdestructed

BigBang and Singularity should not pause repay() and liquidate()

`ARBTriCryptoOracle` is vulnerable to read-only reentrancy

all deposit and withdraw function in Convex and Curve nativeLP Strategy, apply slippage on internal pricing; which call real-time on chain price from Curve directly and subject to MEV

Missing checks for whether Arbitrum Sequencer is active

Allowing `refreshReward()` to fail during minting or buring esLBR could result in gain or loss previously earned reward

Oracle data is insufficiently validated

Chainlink's `latestRoundData` may return stale or incorrect result

Use of slot0 to get sqrtPriceLimitX96 can lead to price manipulation.

[M-01] Some functions in Talos contracts does not allow user to supply slippage and deadline, which may cause swap revert

Lack of slippage protection can lead to significant loss of user funds

Many `create` methods are suspicious of the reorg attack

Oracle Data is insufficiently validated

Missing checks for whether Arbitrum Sequencer is active

No Slippage Protection while Swapping tokens through uniswap router

No Slippage Protection while removing liquidity from Curve Pool

Setting Deadline for `swapExactTokensForTokens` as `type(uint256).max` allows Exploits

Protocol won't be able to handle Fees on Transfer tokens

Re-org attack in factory

Low level calls to accounts with no code will succeed in `FeeWrapper`

Lack of deadline for uniswap AMM

Use of payable.transfer can lead to DOS and Freezing of funds

First Depositor Attack Vulnerability

No slippage in `createAdlOrder` allows MEV Attacks and Loss of funds

Oracle data feed can be outdated

Multiplication after Division error leading to larger precision loss

`doCutDepositFee` and `doCutWithdrawFee` doesn't take `FEES ON TRANSFER TOKENS` in account

`TOKEN_ADDRESS_LIMIT` set but limit not implemented to prevent out-of-gas exceptions when looping over funded addresses for payouts

First vault depositor can steal other's assets

Division before multiplication incurs unnecessary precision loss

User may loose rewards if the receipt is minted after quest end time

Unchecked return values from `transfer` or `transferFrom` could lead to stealing of funds.

Borrower can exploit `roll` method with frontrunning

SOME AMOUNT OF COLLATERAL CAN BE STUCK IN ESCROW

ERC4626Cloned deposit and mint logic differ on first deposit

Inflation of ggAVAX share price by first depositor

Users may not be able to redeem their shares due to underflow

wrong reward distribution between early and late depositors because of the late syncRewards() call in the cycle, syncReward() logic should be executed in each withdraw or deposits (without reverting)