EthereumblackApplication · Ethereumblack Project

CVE-2018-13199

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-07-05
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
The sell function of a smart contract implementation for ETHEREUMBLACK (ETCBK), an Ethereum token, has an integer overflow in which "amount * sellPrice" can be zero, consequently reducing a seller's assets.

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 · high confidence

Integer overflow vulnerability in the ETHEREUMBLACK (ETCBK) token smart contract sell function where the calculation 'amount * sellPrice' can overflow to zero, causing sellers to lose their assets while the transaction still processes.

MitigationReplace unsafe arithmetic operations with SafeMath library functions or use Solidity 0.8+ with built-in overflow checks to ensure the multiplication operation correctly handles large values.

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
EthereumblackApplication
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. Check for ETCBK token holdings
    Review wallet, exchange accounts, or blockchain explorer for any ETHEREUMBLACK (ETCBK) token balance
    Affected if Any ETCBK tokens are held in the environment
  2. Identify the deployed contract address
    Locate the contract address used for ETCBK tokens - check token tracker on Etherscan or similar block explorer, or review internal records if self-hosted
    Affected if A contract address is found that matches ETCBK token standard
  3. Obtain the sell function source code
    Look up the contract source code on Etherscan (if verified) or decompile the bytecode. Search for a function named 'sell', 'sellTokens', or similar that accepts an 'amount' parameter
    Affected if The sell function exists and processes token sales
  4. Inspect the multiplication calculation
    Within the sell function, locate the line that calculates 'amount * sellPrice' or equivalent variable names. Check if this operation uses SafeMath library (look for 'mul' function) or native Solidity arithmetic
    Affected if The multiplication uses raw arithmetic operators (*,/) without SafeMath and the result is used to determine ether payout
  5. Verify SafeMath usage or Solidity version
    Check if the contract imports SafeMath library (look for 'import "./SafeMath.sol"' or similar) and uses .mul() for multiplication, OR check the Solidity compiler version pragma (look for 'pragma solidity ^0.8.0' or higher)
    Affected if Neither SafeMath library is used nor Solidity 0.8+ with overflow checks is specified

The environment is affected if ETCBK tokens are held and the deployed contract contains the vulnerable 'amount * sellPrice' multiplication without SafeMath protection or Solidity 0.8+ overflow checks.

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 functions or use Solidity 0.8+ with built-in overflow checks to ensure the multiplication operation correctly handles large values.

Fix this in Ethereumblack Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation3.0 h
  • Testing2.0 h
  • Review / QA2.0 h
9.0 hours of engineering $1,600
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,560.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13199 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

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-2018-13199 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