CVE-2018-13610
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 MedicayunLink, 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 MedicayunLink Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability that allows the contract owner to manipulate token balances of arbitrary users to any value. This represents both an arithmetic overflow issue and potentially improper access control over 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.
-
Identify deployed MedicayunLink contractSearch your deployed smart contracts for an instance with the name 'Medicayunlink' or 'MedicayunLink' by reviewing your contract deployment records or blockchain explorer recordsAffected if A contract with the Medicayunlink name is found in your deployed contracts
-
Locate the mintToken function in source codeIf you have access to the contract source code, search for a function named 'mintToken' within the contractAffected if A function named 'mintToken' exists in the contract source code
-
Verify SafeMath library usageInspect the mintToken function for SafeMath library usage (e.g., SafeMath.add, SafeMath.sub) for arithmetic operations on token balancesAffected if The mintToken function performs arithmetic on balances WITHOUT using SafeMath library methods
-
Check owner access control on balance manipulationExamine the mintToken function to determine if it allows the contract owner to modify arbitrary user balances without constraints or user consentAffected if The mintToken function permits the owner to set any user's balance to any value without restrictions
-
Confirm contract ownership statusCheck if you are the contract owner by calling the owner() function or equivalent, as the vulnerability is exploitable by the ownerAffected if You hold the owner role on the deployed Medicayunlink contract
You are affected if you have deployed the Medicayunlink smart contract and the mintToken function lacks SafeMath protection or allows unrestricted owner-controlled balance manipulation.
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 dataReplace unsafe arithmetic operations with SafeMath library to prevent integer overflows, and implement proper access controls to restrict or eliminate the owner's ability to arbitrarily set user balances without constraints.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation8.0 h
- Testing6.0 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 $6,176.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13610 — 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-2018-13610 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