Osiris: Hunting for Integer Bugs in Ethereum Smart Contracts

The capability of executing so-called smart contracts in a decentralised manner is one of the compelling features of modern blockchains. Smart contracts are fully fledged programs which cannot be changed once deployed to the blockchain. They typically implement the business logic of distributed apps and carry billions of dollars worth of coins. In that respect, it is imperative that smart contracts are correct and have no vulnerabilities or bugs. However, research has identified different classes of vulnerabilities in smart contracts, some of which led to prominent multi-million dollar fraud cases. In this paper we focus on vulnerabilities related to integer bugs, a class of bugs that is particularly difficult to avoid due to some characteristics of the Ethereum Virtual Machine and the Solidity programming language. In this paper we introduce Osiris – a framework that combines symbolic execution and taint analysis, in order to accurately find integer bugs in Ethereum smart contracts. Osiris detects a greater range of bugs than existing tools, while providing a better specificity of its detection. We have evaluated its performance on a large experimental dataset containing more than 1.2 million smart contracts. We found that 42,108 contracts contain integer bugs. Be- sides being able to identify several vulnerabilities that have been reported in the past few months, we were also able to identify a yet unknown critical vulnerability in a couple of smart contracts that are currently deployed on the Ethereum blockchain

Targeted Greybox Fuzzing with Static Lookahead Analysis

Automatic test generation typically aims to generate inputs that explore new paths in the program under test in order to find bugs. Existing work has, therefore, focused on guiding the exploration toward program parts that are more likely to contain bugs by using an offline static analysis. In this paper, we introduce a novel technique for targeted greybox fuzzing using an online static analysis that guides the fuzzer toward a set of target locations, for instance, located in recently modified parts of the program. This is achieved by first semantically analyzing each program path that is explored by an input in the fuzzer's test suite. The results of this analysis are then used to control the fuzzer's specialized power schedule, which determines how often to fuzz inputs from the test suite. We implemented our technique by extending a state-of-the-art, industrial fuzzer for Ethereum smart contracts and evaluate its effectiveness on 27 real-world benchmarks. Using an online analysis is particularly suitable for the domain of smart contracts since it does not require any code instrumentation---instrumentation to contracts changes their semantics. Our experiments show that targeted fuzzing significantly outperforms standard greybox fuzzing for reaching 83% of the challenging target locations (up to 14x of median speed-up)

Short Paper: Blockcheck the Typechain

Recent efforts have sought to design new smart contract programming languages that make writing blockchain programs safer. But programs on the blockchain are beholden only to the safety properties enforced by the blockchain itself: even the strictest language-only properties can be rendered moot on a language-oblivious blockchain due to inter-contract interactions. Consequently, while safer languages are a necessity, fully realizing their benefits necessitates a language-aware redesign of the blockchain itself. To this end, we propose that the blockchain be viewed as a typechain: a chain of typed programs-not arbitrary blocks-that are included iff they typecheck against the existing chain. Reaching consensus, or blockchecking, validates typechecking in a byzantine fault-tolerant manner. Safety properties traditionally enforced by a runtime are instead enforced by a type system with the aim of statically capturing smart contract correctness. To provide a robust level of safety, we contend that a typechain must minimally guarantee (1) asset linearity and liveness, (2) physical resource availability, including CPU and memory, (3) exceptionless execution, or no early termination, (4) protocol conformance, or adherence to some state machine, and (5) inter-contract safety, including reentrancy safety. Despite their exacting nature, typechains are extensible, allowing for rich libraries that extend the set of verified properties. We expand on typechain properties and present examples of real-world bugs they prevent

Securing Smart Contract On The Fly

We present Solythesis, a source to source Solidity compiler which takes a smart contract code and a user specified invariant as the input and produces an instrumented contract that rejects all transactions that violate the invariant. The design of Solythesis is driven by our observation that the consensus protocol and the storage layer are the primary and the secondary performance bottlenecks of Ethereum, respectively. Solythesis operates with our novel delta update and delta check techniques to minimize the overhead caused by the instrumented storage access statements. Our experimental results validate our hypothesis that the overhead of runtime validation, which is often too expensive for other domains, is in fact negligible for smart contracts. The CPU overhead of Solythesis is only 0.12% on average for our 23 benchmark contracts

Harvey: A Greybox Fuzzer for Smart Contracts

We present Harvey, an industrial greybox fuzzer for smart contracts, which are programs managing accounts on a blockchain. Greybox fuzzing is a lightweight test-generation approach that effectively detects bugs and security vulnerabilities. However, greybox fuzzers randomly mutate program inputs to exercise new paths; this makes it challenging to cover code that is guarded by narrow checks, which are satisfied by no more than a few input values. Moreover, most real-world smart contracts transition through many different states during their lifetime, e.g., for every bid in an auction. To explore these states and thereby detect deep vulnerabilities, a greybox fuzzer would need to generate sequences of contract transactions, e.g., by creating bids from multiple users, while at the same time keeping the search space and test suite tractable. In this experience paper, we explain how Harvey alleviates both challenges with two key fuzzing techniques and distill the main lessons learned. First, Harvey extends standard greybox fuzzing with a method for predicting new inputs that are more likely to cover new paths or reveal vulnerabilities in smart contracts. Second, it fuzzes transaction sequences in a targeted and demand-driven way. We have evaluated our approach on 27 real-world contracts. Our experiments show that the underlying techniques significantly increase Harvey's effectiveness in achieving high coverage and detecting vulnerabilities, in most cases orders-of-magnitude faster; they also reveal new insights about contract code.Comment: arXiv admin note: substantial text overlap with arXiv:1807.0787

Securify: practical security analysis of smart contracts

Permissionless blockchains allow the execution of arbitrary programs (called smart contracts), enabling mutually untrusted entities to interact without relying on trusted third parties. Despite their potential, repeated security concerns have shaken the trust in handling billions of USD by smart contracts. To address this problem, we present Securify, a security analyzer for Ethereum smart contracts that is scalable, fully automated, and able to prove contract behaviors as safe/unsafe with respect to a given property. Securify's analysis consists of two steps. First, it symbolically analyzes the contract's dependency graph to extract precise semantic information from the code. Then, it checks compliance and violation patterns that capture sufficient conditions for proving if a property holds or not. To enable extensibility, all patterns are specified in a designated domain-specific language. Securify is publicly released, it has analyzed >18K contracts submitted by its users, and is regularly used to conduct security audits by experts. We present an extensive evaluation of Securify over real-world Ethereum smart contracts and demonstrate that it can effectively prove the correctness of smart contracts and discover critical violations

Cross-Contract Static Analysis for Detecting Practical Reentrancy Vulnerabilities in Smart Contracts

© 2020 ACM. Reentrancy bugs, one of the most severe vulnerabilities in smart contracts, have caused huge financial loss in recent years. Researchers have proposed many approaches to detecting them. However, empirical studies have shown that these approaches suffer from undesirable false positives and false negatives, when the code under detection involves the interaction between multiple smart contracts. In this paper, we propose an accurate and efficient cross-contract reentrancy detection approach in practice. Rather than design rule-of-thumb heuristics, we conduct a large empirical study of 11714 real-world contracts from Etherscan against three well-known general-purpose security tools for reentrancy detection. We manually summarized the reentrancy scenarios where the state-of-the-art approaches cannot address. Based on the empirical evidence, we present Clairvoyance, a cross-function and cross-contract static analysis to detect reentrancy vulnerabilities in real world with significantly higher accuracy. To reduce false negatives, we enable, for the first time, a cross-contract call chain analysis by tracking possibly tainted paths. To reduce false positives, we systematically summarized five major path protective techniques (PPTs) to support fast yet precise path feasibility checking. We implemented our approach and compared Clairvoyance with five state-of-the-art tools on 17770 real-worlds contracts. The results show that Clairvoyance yields the best detection accuracy among all the five tools and also finds 101 unknown reentrancy vulnerabilities