dbcve.org
VittokenApplication · Vicetoken

CVE-2018-13508

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.1 Published 2018-07-09
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 mintToken function of a smart contract implementation for VITToken, 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 confidence

The VITToken Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability in its mintToken function. This allows the contract owner to manipulate token balances to any value due to improper arithmetic validation during token minting.

MitigationFix requires adding SafeMath library or equivalent overflow checks in the mintToken function, along with proper access control validation, followed by contract re-deployment and verification of token integrity.

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
VittokenApplication
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:3.1/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. Confirm you are using VITToken/Vittoken contract
    Identify the deployed contract address and verify it corresponds to the VITToken (Vittoken) Ethereum token by checking the contract name and symbol in your blockchain explorer or by reviewing your token configuration files
    Affected if The deployed contract is VICToken/Vittoken or any version of this specific token
  2. Locate the mintToken function in the contract
    Query the contract ABI or retrieve the source code from a block explorer (Etherscan) or your deployment artifacts. Search for a function named 'mintToken' or 'mint' that accepts a parameter for the token amount
    Affected if The contract contains a mintToken function that allows creating new tokens
  3. Check for SafeMath library usage in mintToken
    Examine the source code of the mintToken function. Look for library calls such as 'using SafeMath for uint256' or arithmetic operations that lack SafeMath protection (direct addition/subtraction without overflow checks)
    Affected if The mintToken function performs arithmetic without SafeMath or equivalent overflow protection (e.g., direct addition like 'balanceOf[to] += amount' instead of SafeMath.add())
  4. Verify contract owner access to mintToken
    Review the function visibility and access control modifiers. Check if mintToken is callable by the contract owner (look for 'onlyOwner' modifier or similar access control)
    Affected if The contract owner can call mintToken to arbitrarily increase token balances without restrictions
  5. Compare source code to vulnerable pattern
    Look for the specific vulnerable pattern: balance[to] += tokenAmount or similar arithmetic without checks in the mintToken function
    Affected if The code shows direct addition to balances without overflow validation (e.g., 'balances[to] = balances[to].add(amount)' is safe, but 'balances[to] += amount' without SafeMath is vulnerable)

You are affected if you are using any version of the VITToken (Vittoken) Ethereum smart contract and that contract's source code shows a mintToken function lacking SafeMath or overflow checks in its arithmetic operations.

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

Fix requires adding SafeMath library or equivalent overflow checks in the mintToken function, along with proper access control validation, followed by contract re-deployment and verification of token integrity.

Fix this in Vittoken Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation3.0 h
  • Implementation6.0 h
  • Testing5.0 h
  • Review / QA4.0 h
18.0 hours of engineering $3,150
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $5,040.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13508 — 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-2018-13508 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