本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

audit-liquidation-dos

Audits Solidity liquidation mechanisms for denial of service vulnerabilities including unbounded loops over positions causing out-of-gas reverts, data structure corruption preventing liquidation, front-running to block liquidation via nonce changes or self-liquidation, pending withdrawals forcing reverts, malicious ERC721/ERC20 callback reverts, collateral in external vaults not seized, insufficient insurance fund blocking liquidation, fixed bonus exceeding available collateral, incorrect decimal handling, conflicting nonReentrant modifiers, zero value transfer reverts, token deny list issues, and single borrower edge cases

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(5)

  • SKILL.md6.0 KB
  • checklist.md1.3 KB
  • example.md17.2 KB
  • reference.md4.1 KB
  • templates/report-template.md7.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Liquidation DoS Auditor

When to Use

  • Auditing liquidation mechanisms for DoS vectors
  • User mentions: liquidation DoS, unbounded loops, gas limits, front-run liquidation, callback attacks, reentrancy, token compatibility
  • Analyzing liquidation griefing attacks, gas exhaustion, revert conditions
  • Reviewing position enumeration, collateral seizure, token integrations

Audit Workflow

IMPORTANT: Announce skill usage at the start of analysis

Begin with: "I'm using the audit-liquidation-dos skill to analyze this contract for liquidation denial of service vulnerabilities..."

  1. Scan for liquidation operations

    • Search: liquidate, seizeCollateral, for, while, onERC721Received, transfer, nonReentrant, positions, EnumerableSet
    • Focus: loops, callbacks, reentrancy guards, token transfers, balance checks
  2. Check against vulnerability patterns

    • Reference reference.md for complete checklist
    • Compare code against example.md
  3. Validate exploitability

    • Check access control first - grep for onlyOwner|onlyAdmin|onlyGovernance modifiers
    • Can non-privileged actors trigger liquidation DoS?
    • Can liquidation be blocked via gas exhaustion?
    • Can users front-run to prevent liquidation?
    • Can callbacks or hooks revert liquidation?
    • Can token incompatibilities block liquidation?
    • Verify no compensating protections exist
    • Downgrade severity if admin-only unless prevents all liquidations
  4. Generate report

    • Use deliverable template below
    • Include PoC showing DoS condition
    • Rank by severity

Core Vulnerability Patterns

See reference.md for full checklist. Key patterns:

  1. Unbounded loops over positions → OOG revert during liquidation
  2. Data structure corruption → liquidation reverts on corrupted state
  3. Front-run prevention → nonce change or self-liquidation blocks liquidator
  4. Pending withdrawals → equal to balance causes revert
  5. Malicious callbacks → ERC721/ERC20 hooks revert to prevent liquidation
  6. External vault collateral → not seized during liquidation
  7. Insufficient insurance fund → bad debt blocks liquidation
  8. Fixed bonus exceeds collateral → 110% bonus fails when ratio < 110%
  9. Non-18 decimal handling → precision errors cause reverts
  10. Multiple nonReentrant → conflicting guards block execution
  11. Zero transfer reverts → missing checks with strict tokens
  12. Token deny lists → USDC blocklists prevent transfers
  13. Single borrower edge case → assumes > 1 borrower

Code examples: See example.md

Severity Criteria

Critical: Liquidation permanently blocked causing protocol insolvency, all positions unliquidatable, MUST be exploitable by non-privileged actors High: Specific positions unliquidatable via griefing, protocol accumulates bad debt from DoS, MUST be exploitable by non-privileged actors Medium: Liquidation delayed or requires special conditions, increases bad debt risk, admin-only liquidation function DoS issues with cascading impact Low: Edge case DoS with limited impact, easily mitigated, admin-only function issues without immediate liquidation impact

IMPORTANT: Admin-only liquidation functions (onlyOwner, onlyAdmin, onlyGovernance) with DoS vectors are MEDIUM or LOW severity unless:

  • Admin function failure prevents all liquidations protocol-wide
  • DoS in admin function enables bad debt accumulation affecting all users
  • Admin liquidation path is the only liquidation mechanism (no trustless alternative)

False Positives - Do NOT Flag

  • Bounded loops with documented max limits
  • Trusted token integrations (if explicitly documented)
  • Admin-controlled liquidation paths with known restrictions
  • Intentional liquidation delays with explicit design docs
  • Protocols using liquidation queues or alternative mechanisms
  • Admin-only liquidation helper functions (onlyOwner, onlyAdmin) where public liquidation path exists
  • Governance-controlled collateral seizure functions with documented emergency-only usage
  • Admin batch liquidation functions with gas limits where single liquidation still works

Deliverable Format

MANDATORY: Before deliverable, verify each checklist.md item against codebase. Flag violations as findings.

Use template: templates/report-template.md

Each finding includes: severity, pattern #, file/lines, description, vulnerable code, DoS impact analysis, PoC showing griefing attack, remediation, gas impact.

Key Principles

  • Bounded iteration - never loop over unbounded user-controlled arrays
  • Graceful degradation - liquidation should work even with bad debt/edge cases
  • Front-run resistance - liquidation cannot be blocked by borrower actions
  • Callback isolation - external calls cannot revert liquidation
  • Token compatibility - handle zero transfers, deny lists, non-standard decimals

Output Guidelines

DO:

  • Reference specific lines and functions
  • Provide executable PoCs showing DoS
  • Quantify gas limits and iteration costs
  • Show token compatibility issues

DON'T:

  • Report intentional design choices with documentation
  • Flag bounded loops with max limits
  • Use vague terms ("could cause DoS")
  • Ignore compensating mechanisms (liquidation queues, etc.)

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Complete architecture reference for the A3 insurance platform — file locations, data flow, conventions, microservice map, and fullstack patterns

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

Drafts U.S. commercial real estate access and indemnity (right-of-entry) agreements for pre-closing due diligence. Covers license grants, non-invasive vs invasive testing gates, insurance/endorsement requirements, indemnity with discovery carve-outs, restoration and lien remedies, confidentiality, and anti-indemnity guardrails. Trigger: access agreement, right of entry, due diligence access, Phase I/II, invasive testing, pre-PSA site inspection.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

当用户需要对意外险投保问卷进行专业、结构化的核保审查,提取职业类别、工作环境、作业内容、危险活动参与情况、交通出行习惯、特殊工作暴露及其他可能影响意外险承保判断的高风险信息,并生成适合意外险核保、补问流转和风险分层处理的结构化分析结果时使用本 skill。

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

Inspect, schema, and fill true AcroForm PDFs using sciClaw's pdf_form_inspect, pdf_form_schema, and pdf_form_fill tools. Use when: (1) checking whether a PDF is a real fillable AcroForm, (2) listing form field names, types, and choices, (3) filling a supported form from structured values, (4) preparing reviewable insurance, legal, administrative, or clinical form drafts, (5) reporting skipped fields or unused input keys after a fill. Do not use for scanned PDFs, OCR tasks, or XFA-only forms.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

Guide actuarial analysis for insurance pricing. TRIGGERS - Use when user needs help with actuarial-analysis related tasks.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

Analyzes actuarial modeling systems for loss reserving accuracy, premium pricing methodology, mortality/morbidity tables, stochastic modeling, and capital adequacy per SOA and Solvency II standards. USE THIS SKILL WHEN: - You need to review or audit actuarial models (reserving, pricing, capital) - Someone asks about loss triangle analysis or reserve adequacy - You are evaluating IBNR calculations, chain ladder methods, or Bornhuetter-Ferguson - A project involves insurance pricing, GLM rating models, or ratemaking - You need to assess Solvency II SCR calculations or RBC compliance - Someone mentions actuarial opinions, ASOP compliance, or SOA standards - You are reviewing stochastic models, ESG configurations, or DFA frameworks - A codebase uses actuarial libraries (chainladder, lifetables, ChainLadder R package) TRIGGER PHRASES: "actuarial", "loss reserving", "IBNR", "chain ladder", "premium pricing", "mortality table", "Solvency II", "capital adequacy", "ratemaking", "GLM pricing", "risk-based capital", "reserve analysis", "actuarial opinion"

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

FDU-INS/Insurance-Skills762026年7月12日 更新

FDU-INS のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する