CVE-2018-13200
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 · uneditedThe sell function of a smart contract implementation for DateMe (DMX) (Contract Name: ProgressiveToken), 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 confidenceThe DateMe (DMX) token smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability in its sell function where the calculation 'amount * sellPrice' can wrap to zero due to integer overflow, causing sellers to receive zero tokens despite valid input.
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 dataall versionsCVSS 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 checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify the deployed DMX token contractLocate the DateMe (DMX) token contract address in your environment. This is typically found in your deployment artifacts, blockchain explorers, or configuration files where the token contract address is stored.Affected if A DMX token contract is deployed in your environment
-
Obtain the contract source codeRetrieve the deployed smart contract source code either from a verified contract on a block explorer (Etherscan, etc.) or from your source code repositories. Look for a function named 'sell' or 'sellTokens'.Affected if Source code is available and contains a sell function with the pattern 'amount * sellPrice'
-
Verify the Solidity compiler versionCheck the compiler version pragma in the source code (e.g., 'pragma solidity ^0.4.0' or 'pragma solidity >=0.4.0 <0.8.0').Affected if The contract is compiled with Solidity version 0.7.x or lower
-
Check for SafeMath library usageSearch the source code for 'using SafeMath' or import statements for SafeMath. Specifically check if the multiplication in the sell function uses SafeMath for the amount calculation (e.g., 'amount.mul(sellPrice)' vs 'amount * sellPrice').Affected if The contract does NOT use SafeMath for the amount * sellPrice multiplication
-
Inspect the sell function logicExamine the sell function to confirm it performs the calculation 'amount * sellPrice' directly without overflow protection and that the result is used to determine token transfer amounts.Affected if The sell function performs unprotected multiplication that can overflow to zero
Your environment is affected if you have deployed the DateMe (DMX) token contract and it uses Solidity below 0.8 without SafeMath protection for the amount * sellPrice calculation in the sell function.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
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 dataReplace the vulnerable multiplication with SafeMath library functions or upgrade to Solidity 0.8+ which includes built-in overflow checks to prevent the multiplication from overflowing to zero.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA2.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,512.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13200 — 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 sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-13200 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
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.
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.
- 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