CVE-2018-13550
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 Coquinho Coin (CQNC) (Contract Name: CoquinhoERC20), 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 CoquinhoERC20 smart contract allows the contract owner to manipulate token balances of arbitrary users to any value due to missing overflow protection in arithmetic operations.
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.
-
Locate CoquinhoERC20 contract source codeSearch your codebase or contract deployment artifacts for files named CoquinhoERC20.sol or similar. If deploying on-chain, query the contract bytecode or source code from block explorers using the contract address.Affected if The CoquinhoERC20 contract is present in your environment or deployed on-chain.
-
Verify mintToken function existsSearch the contract source code for the function signature 'function mintToken(address target, uint256 mintedAmount)' or similar variations that allow token minting to arbitrary addresses.Affected if A mintToken or equivalent function that allows the owner to create tokens for arbitrary users is present in the contract.
-
Confirm SafeMath is not used for arithmetic operationsSearch the contract file for 'import "./SafeMath.sol"' or 'using SafeMath for' statements. Also check if arithmetic operations in mintToken use SafeMath methods (e.g., add, sub, mul) instead of plain operators (+, -, *).Affected if SafeMath library is not imported or not applied to the arithmetic operations in mintToken, meaning overflow protection is missing.
-
Check for explicit overflow check implementationsIf SafeMath is not used, manually inspect the mintToken function for manual overflow checks (e.g., 'require(mintedAmount <= limit)' or 'if (mintedAmount > ... ) revert()'). Look for require statements validating against uint256 max value.Affected if No SafeMath library and no manual overflow/underflow checks exist on arithmetic operations in mintToken.
You are affected if the CoquinhoERC20 contract is deployed in your environment and its mintToken function lacks SafeMath or equivalent overflow protection on arithmetic operations.
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 dataImplement SafeMath library or equivalent overflow checks on all arithmetic operations, particularly in token minting and balance modification functions.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation2.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,224.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13550 — 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-2018-13550 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