CVE-2018-13612
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 Robincoin, 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 Robincoin Ethereum smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability that allows the contract owner to manipulate user balances to any arbitrary value. This occurs due to missing overflow checks when updating token balances in the minting 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 Robincoin token holdingsCheck your Ethereum wallet or block explorer for Robincoin (RBC) token balance and note the contract addressAffected if You hold Robincoin tokens and the contract has not been migrated to a fixed version
-
Locate the deployed smart contractAffected if A live contract exists at the token address with the vulnerable mintToken function
-
Verify mintToken function existsReview the contract source code or decompiled bytecode for a function named mintToken that accepts an address and an amount parameter without SafeMath operationsAffected if The mintToken function exists and performs balance updates using manual arithmetic (+=) instead of SafeMath library calls
-
Check for overflow protectionInspect the contract source code to confirm whether SafeMath library is imported and used for balance modifications, or if Solidity version 0.8+ is declaredAffected if No SafeMath library is used AND Solidity version is below 0.8 AND manual balance arithmetic is present in minting logic
-
Analyze on-chain minting activitySearch blockchain explorer for transactions calling the mintToken function, particularly those with unusually large value arguments or targeting specific addressesAffected if Transactions exist that called mintToken with values that would exceed uint256 limits or that added unexpected tokens to addresses
You are affected if you hold Robincoin tokens from a contract where the mintToken function uses manual arithmetic without SafeMath or Solidity 0.8+ overflow protection.
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 manual arithmetic operations with SafeMath library functions or upgrade to Solidity 0.8+ for built-in overflow protection; review and restrict minting privileges to prevent abuse.
- 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-2018-13612 — 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-2018-13612 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