CVE-2018-13575
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 YESToken, 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 confidenceThe mintToken function in the YESToken Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability that allows the contract owner to set any user's token balance to an arbitrary value by providing manipulated integers to the function.
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 you have deployed YESTokenCheck your deployed contracts list or blockchain explorers (Etherscan) for the YESToken contract address. Search for contracts named 'YESToken' or 'YesToken' on networks where you hold assets.Affected if You have deployed the YESToken contract on any Ethereum network (mainnet, testnet, or private chain).
-
Verify mintToken function existsIn the contract ABI or source code, look for a function named 'mintToken' that accepts parameters (typically address target, uint256 amount). Use a blockchain explorer or your development tools to query the contract for this function signature.Affected if The deployed contract contains a mintToken function that allows the owner to modify token balances.
-
Check for integer overflow protectionReview the contract source code. Look for: (1) usage of SafeMath library for arithmetic operations (e.g., SafeMath.add, SafeMath.sub), OR (2) contract compiled with Solidity version 0.8.0 or higher which has built-in overflow checks.Affected if The contract lacks SafeMath library usage AND is compiled with Solidity below 0.8.0, making arithmetic operations vulnerable to overflow.
-
Confirm contract ownershipCheck if you (or your organization) are the contract owner/owner. Query the 'owner' state variable or call the 'owner()' function on the contract.Affected if You are the contract owner and the vulnerable mintToken function is accessible to you, meaning the overflow can be exploited.
You are affected if you have deployed the YESToken contract without SafeMath or Solidity 0.8+ overflow protection, as the owner can manipulate balances through the mintToken function.
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 dataUpgrade to a patched version of the contract that implements proper integer overflow protection (e.g., using SafeMath library or Solidity 0.8+ with built-in overflow checks). If already deployed, the vulnerable contract must be replaced through re-deployment and token migration.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation6.0 h
- Testing8.0 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 $6,080.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13575 — 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-2018-13575 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