CVE-2018-13553
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 Micro BTC (MBTC), 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 Micro BTC (MBTC) Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability that can be exploited by the contract owner to set arbitrary user balances, potentially enabling unauthorized token creation or balance manipulation.
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 the deployed Micro BTC contractQuery the blockchain for the MBTC token contract address and retrieve its deployed bytecode or source code from a block explorer like EtherscanAffected if You are running or interacting with a deployed MBTC contract that has not been migrated to a patched version
-
Check for SafeMath library usageExamine the contract source code for 'using SafeMath for' statement or library imports. Search for SafeMath library functions like add, sub, mulAffected if SafeMath is not used for arithmetic operations in the mintToken function, leaving it vulnerable to integer overflow
-
Verify Solidity compiler versionCheck the 'pragma solidity' directive in the contract source code to identify the compiler version usedAffected if The contract is compiled with Solidity below 0.8.0, which lacks built-in overflow checks
-
Inspect the mintToken functionReview the mintToken function code specifically for arithmetic operations (addition, multiplication) that lack overflow protectionAffected if The mintToken function performs balance updates using direct arithmetic without SafeMath or compiler-level overflow checks
-
Confirm contract ownership statusCheck if you are the contract owner using the owner() function or by examining the deployer addressAffected if You are the contract owner and the vulnerable mintToken function is accessible, allowing potential balance manipulation
You are affected if the deployed MBTC contract uses Solidity below 0.8.0 without SafeMath library protection in the mintToken function, allowing integer overflow exploitation.
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 dataFix by implementing SafeMath library for arithmetic operations or migrating to Solidity 0.8+ with built-in overflow checks, followed by secure redeployment of the contract with appropriate migration mechanisms for token holders.
- Consultation6.0 h
- Implementation12.0 h
- Testing10.0 h
- Review / QA8.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $10,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13553 — 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-2018-13553 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