CVE-2018-13492
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 mintToken function of a smart contract implementation for naga, an Ethereum token, has an integer overflow that allows the owner of the contract to set the balance of an arbitrary user to any value.
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 confidenceThe mintToken function in the naga Ethereum token smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability that allows the contract owner to manipulate the balance of any user to an arbitrary value. This is a classic access control and arithmetic safety issue in Solidity smart contracts.
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 if Naga token contract is presentQuery the blockchain for the Naga token contract address. If you are running a node or dApp that interacts with Naga, check your contract registry or configuration for the Naga token address.Affected if Your environment contains or interacts with the Naga (Gfx Rs Naga) token smart contract
-
Locate the contract source codeObtain the deployed bytecode or source code of the Naga token contract. Search for 'mintToken' function in the contract. Etherscan or similar block explorers can provide source code verification.Affected if The contract contains a function named mintToken that performs arithmetic operations on balances
-
Check for SafeMath usageInspect the contract source code for SafeMath library imports and usage. Look for SafeMath.add, SafeMath.sub patterns versus direct arithmetic operations (+, -).Affected if The mintToken function uses direct arithmetic operators (+, -, *, /) instead of SafeMath library functions for balance calculations
-
Verify owner access to mintTokenReview the mintToken function definition to confirm it is marked as 'public' or 'external' and accessible without restrictions. Check if there is missing or inadequate access control (no onlyOwner modifier).Affected if The mintToken function can be called by the contract owner without proper access restrictions, allowing arbitrary balance manipulation
Your environment is affected if you have deployed or interact with the Naga token contract and its mintToken function lacks SafeMath overflow protection and proper access controls, enabling the owner to arbitrarily manipulate user balances.
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 arithmetic operations in mintToken with SafeMath library functions to prevent integer overflows, and implement proper access controls to restrict balance manipulation capabilities.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 h
- Review / QA4.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13492 — 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-2018-13492 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