dbcve.org
Ioct CoinApplication · Ioct Coin Project

CVE-2018-13616

HIGH · 7.5 CVSS v3.0 Published 2018-07-09
Mitigation only
No fix yet — a mitigation exists. There is no fixed release. A documented workaround reduces exposure in the meantime.
See remediation →
84/100
Remediation priority · High
Remotely reachable No privileges Zero-click

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 · unedited
The mintToken function of a smart contract implementation for IOCT_Coin, 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 confidence

The IOCT_Coin Ethereum token smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability in its mintToken function. This allows the contract owner to manipulate the balance of any user to arbitrary values by exploiting the overflow condition when minting new tokens, potentially creating unauthorized token supply or draining existing balances.

MitigationUpgrade to a patched version of the contract that implements SafeMath or proper integer overflow checks in the mintToken function. Consider using a professionally audited ERC-20 token implementation.

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 data
Ioct CoinApplication
Affected:all versions

CVSS 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 checks

Work through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.

  1. Identify IOCT token holdings
    Check your Ethereum wallet or exchange accounts for any IOCT token balance. Search transaction history for 'IOCT' token transfers or check token tracking websites for addresses where you have received this token.
    Affected if You hold any balance of IOCT tokens in any Ethereum address you control
  2. Locate the IOCT contract address
    Look up the official IOCT token contract address on the token's website, CoinMarketCap, CoinGecko, or by searching your transaction history for IOCT transfers on Etherscan.
    Affected if You cannot locate a specific contract address for IOCT (the token may not be deployed or may use a different name)
  3. Retrieve the contract source code
    On Etherscan, go to the contract address page, click 'Contract' tab, and look for 'Source Code'. If verified, examine the mintToken function. If not verified, use the 'Read Contract' tab to interact with it.
    Affected if The contract source code is not verified or available for inspection
  4. Check mintToken for overflow protection
    In the contract source code, locate the mintToken function. Search for 'SafeMath', 'require', or overflow checks within the function. Specifically look for arithmetic operations on balances that lack SafeMath library usage or overflow guards.
    Affected if The mintToken function performs arithmetic (addition/subtraction) on token balances without using SafeMath or inline overflow checks
  5. Determine contract ownership
    In the 'Read Contract' section on Etherscan, call the 'owner' function to see who can mint tokens. Check if your address or an address you control is the owner.
    Affected if An address you control or trust is the owner, meaning the vulnerable mintToken function can be called

You are affected if you hold IOCT tokens from a contract whose mintToken function lacks SafeMath or overflow protection, especially if the owner can manipulate your balance.

Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.

Check your environment

Paste your version and any relevant configuration and it will be compared against the affected criteria above. Do not include secrets or credentials.

AI-assisted, checked against the advisory. Informational, not a guarantee.

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 data
Mitigation available No clean upgrade yet — mitigate in the meantime
Mitigation

Upgrade to a patched version of the contract that implements SafeMath or proper integer overflow checks in the mintToken function. Consider using a professionally audited ERC-20 token implementation.

Fix this in Ioct Coin Scoped from the published advisory
  • Consultation2.0 h
  • Implementation4.0 h
  • Testing3.0 h
  • Review / QA1.0 h
10.0 hours of engineering $1,750
Get help mitigating

An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.

Scan for this in your stack

Free · runs locally
dbcve dependency scanner

Check whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-13616 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.

Get it on GitHub Scan in the browser

References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.

Primary sources

Practitioner notes

Contributed

Peer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2018-13616 in production — separate from our analysis above.

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.

What this is

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.

What belongs here
  • 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