CVE-2018-13506
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 SDR22, 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 · high confidenceInteger overflow vulnerability in the mintToken function of the SDR22 Ethereum token smart contract allows the contract owner to set arbitrary user balances. This is caused by unchecked arithmetic operations on balance values without using SafeMath or equivalent overflow protection.
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 target contractLocate the smart contract source code or bytecode. Verify it is the SDR22 token contract from the Self Drive Rental Project.Affected if The deployed contract is the SDR22 token from Self Drive Rental Project and contains a mintToken function.
-
Locate the mintToken functionSearch the contract source code for a function named 'mintToken' or 'mint'. Inspect its implementation for arithmetic operations that modify user balances.Affected if A mintToken function exists that performs arithmetic on balance variables without proper overflow protection.
-
Examine balance arithmetic in mintTokenReview all addition, subtraction, multiplication, or assignment operations on balance variables within the mintToken function. Check if they use SafeMath library methods (add, sub, mul) or native Solidity 0.8+ overflow checks.Affected if Balance arithmetic in mintToken uses plain operators (+, -, *, =) without SafeMath or equivalent overflow checks, allowing integer overflow.
-
Verify Solidity versionCheck the compiler version pragma at the top of the contract (for example, 'pragma solidity ^0.4.0;'). Determine if the contract uses Solidity 0.8.0 or higher which includes built-in overflow checking.Affected if The contract is compiled with Solidity below 0.8.0 and does not use SafeMath, making overflow attacks possible.
If the deployed contract is the SDR22 token from Self Drive Rental with a mintToken function that uses unchecked arithmetic on balances (not SafeMath and not Solidity 0.8+), the environment is affected by CVE-2018-13506.
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 dataApply SafeMath library for arithmetic operations or migrate to Solidity 0.8+ with built-in overflow checks. Verify the fix through comprehensive testing including boundary conditions.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing12.0 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 $7,616.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13506 — 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-2018-13506 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