A well Detailed Information On Interger Overflow Attack On The Blockchain Network

Source

An integer overflow attack is a class of vulnerability that occurs when the arithmetic operation to be performed exceeds the storage capacity (i.e., becomes too large) of the assigned location, or memory container, in which the result is to be stored in a computer system. In blockchain systems, and particularly smart contracts, integer overflow attacks can cause bizarre and/or catastrophic behavior and contribute to loss or theft of assets due to idiosyncratic-what subject matter experts term as unpredictable-results. They take advantage of certain constraints on how numbers are represented and manipulated that often elude both developers/contract-writers and users.

In terms of smart contracts-(digital “deeds” whose automatically executing code digitally enforces commitments where their terms (often financial/governance) parts have been directly recorded into code involving contract participants)-integer overflow vulnerabilities can have catastrophically bad results when banks or other sorts of valuable properties are at stake. Smart contracts operate on their own after being deployed by externalizing critical logic so that any vulnerability they might contain cannot later be modified directly.

To prevent against such risks, it is necessary for developers to follow best practices in smart contract programming and implement safety mechanisms that can prevent integer overflows. The good news is that there exist a number of such strategies and tools that can help guard against this vector of attack.

In programming, an integer overflow happens when you try to store a number that’s too big for a designated slot. In most programming languages, if you have declared a variable to hold an unsigned 8-bit integer (which would normally be in the range of 0-255), and subsequent calculation cause its value to go over its maximum (i.e., 255 +1), the result “wraps around” back to zero, giving you an unexpected outcome.

In blockchain systems, smart contracts often involve rather convoluted calculations about token balances, rewards or transfer amounts. If one of those becomes subject to integer overflow and at least one contract participant might benefit from having it bring the whole operation “wrap around”, the attacker will likely mount such attack trying either to trigger an overly generous transfer due to wrap around or simply confuse the execution logic.

Noteworthy integer overflow attacks were deployed against Ethereum based smart contracts. One such example is the Bancor Network in 2017 whereby an integer overflow vulnerability enabled attackers to drain millions of dollars’ worth of tokens by underflowing the token balance calculations in the contract.

There is a need to comprehend how such attacks are perpetrated and incorporate measures to prevent such situations from happening when carrying out arithmetic operations. Several tools and techniques have been developed to avert the occurrence of integer overflow within smart contracts deployed on the blockchain.

Source

• SafeMath Libraries: Safe Mathematics levels are also one of the most utilized tools when developing smart contracts in the Ethereum blockchain. This library comes with arithmetic functions which will allow for computations only if an overflow does not occur. In case there is an overflow that was bound to take place during the operation, the transaction is canceled in order to avoid the execution of the contract with incorrect data. Such libraries as SafeMath are in active use in ERC-20 and similar token standards optimization to prevent integer overflow attacks.

• Compiler Warnings and Static Analysis: Warnings are also given to the developers about any potential integer overflow vulnerabilities when using smart contract development tools. Such warnings are usually unnecessary since tools for static code analysis like MythX and Slither which can also check for integer overflows in the smart contract code provision these. Thus, these tools check the code without running it through an execution engine, and possible concerns which are for attention before the code is moved to production environment, mod or deploy, are summarized.

• Unit Testing and Auditing: Unit testing is a solution for corner cases as well as to ensure that smart contracts behave as expected, under different conditions.

To secure the blockchain development, developers should adhere to proper guidelines when writing and propagating smart contracts to avoid integer overflow attacks. These guidelines are aimed at guaranteeing the safety of the arithmetic operations performed and the security of the contract.

• Bases on the Limitations on User Input: One technique of avoiding an overflow attack is placing some limitations on the input given by a user. For instance, if a contract provides for input of specific values in a token transfer or even in offering tokens as rewards, then the contract should state that any input that goes beyond this limit must be disregarded. By imposing restrictions on the input provided by the users, developers do avoid strange occurrences of arithmetic overflows.

• Use of Fixed Point: Other smart contracts may involve very delicate calculations with fractions for example loans, rewards, or fees, in such situations, it is recommended that fixed- point mathematics be utilized. With the help of the two, fixed-point can help control the computation does not exceed certain limits and also helps avoid the risks of rounding up or overflows when a large amount of calculation is needed.

Source

Blockchain networks are vulnerable to integer overflow attacks, particularly in smart contracts that handle financial transactions and assets. Adversaries can exploit arithmetic operation vulnerabilities to interfere with contract logic and steal large quantities of money unnoticeably. Developers, therefore, need to use SafeMath libraries, verify their code carefully, perform audits, and write secure smart contracts against such threats.