dbcve.org
GvtokenApplication · Genesis Vision

CVE-2018-11335

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-07-04
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.

NVD · unedited
GVToken Genesis Vision (GVT) is a smart contract running on Ethereum. The mint function has an integer overflow that allows minted tokens to be arbitrarily retrieved by the contract owner.

Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.

dbcve analysis · moderate confidence

The GVToken (GVT) Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability in its mint function. This arithmetic error allows the contract owner to bypass token supply limits and retrieve arbitrarily large amounts of minted tokens, effectively enabling unauthorized token creation and theft.

MitigationReplace unsafe arithmetic operations with SafeMath library (or migrate to Solidity 0.8+) to prevent integer overflows, and audit the mint function's access control logic to ensure token minting adheres to intended supply caps and distribution rules.

Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.

Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.

NVD · CPE data
GvtokenApplication
Affected:all versions

CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.

From the vector
Attack vector
Network
Complexity
Low
Privileges
None
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
High
Availability
None

CVSS:3.0/AV:N/AC:L/PR:N/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:H/A:N

Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.

dbcve checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify GVToken contract deployment
    Query the blockchain for the GVToken (GVT) contract address. If using the Genesis Vision platform, locate the token contract address from their documentation or block explorer and verify the contract exists at that address.
    Affected if The GVToken (GVT) contract is deployed on any network the user controls or uses.
  2. Check SafeMath usage in source code
    Obtain the contract source code (from Etherscan if verified, or from project repositories). Search the source for 'using SafeMath' or 'import' statements referencing SafeMath library. Alternatively, check if the Solidity compiler version is 0.8.0 or higher.
    Affected if The contract does NOT use SafeMath library AND is compiled with Solidity below version 0.8.
  3. Inspect mint function for unsafe arithmetic
    Locate the 'mint' function in the contract source code. Examine the token amount calculation (typically involving multiplication or addition). Look for operations without SafeMath wrappers (e.g., directly using '+', '-', '*', '/' operators instead of safeAdd, safeMul).
    Affected if The mint function uses direct arithmetic operators on token amounts without SafeMath wrappers.
  4. Verify supply cap enforcement
    Review the mint function logic to see if it checks against a maximum supply limit before minting. Look for require statements or if conditions that validate totalSupply + amount <= maxSupply.
    Affected if The mint function has no supply cap checks, or the cap can be bypassed through the integer overflow.
  5. Confirm contract ownership
    Check if the contract has an owner role and if the mint function is restricted to the owner. Review the function modifier (e.g., 'onlyOwner') on the mint function.
    Affected if The mint function is callable by the contract owner and the vulnerability allows the owner to exploit the overflow.

A user is affected if they have deployed the GVToken (GVT) smart contract without SafeMath or Solidity 0.8+ and the mint function contains unsafe arithmetic operations that can be exploited to bypass supply limits.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.

From vendor data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Replace unsafe arithmetic operations with SafeMath library (or migrate to Solidity 0.8+) to prevent integer overflows, and audit the mint function's access control logic to ensure token minting adheres to intended supply caps and distribution rules.

Fix this in Gvtoken Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation4.0 h
  • Implementation8.0 h
  • Testing12.0 h
  • Review / QA6.0 h
30.0 hours of engineering $5,120
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $8,192.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-11335 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-11335 in production — separate from our analysis above.

No notes yet

Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.

What this is

A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.

What belongs here
  • Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
  • Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
  • No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
  • No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data