CVE-2018-14576
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 mintTokens function of a smart contract implementation for SunContract, an Ethereum token, has an integer overflow via the _amount variable.
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 mintTokens function in the SunContract Ethereum token smart contract contains an integer overflow vulnerability in the _amount parameter. This allows an attacker to bypass arithmetic limits by providing a crafted _value that causes the integer to overflow, potentially minting a vastly larger amount of tokens than intended.
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:3.1/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 SunContract token smart contractObtain the deployed contract address from blockchain explorers (e.g., Etherscan) or the official SunContract project repository. Retrieve the source code or decompiled bytecode.Affected if Unable to obtain source code for verification
-
Find the mintTokens function in source codeSearch the contract source code for the function definition 'function mintTokens' or 'function mint' and examine its implementation.Affected if Function does not exist or is not accessible
-
Verify SafeMath library usageCheck if the contract imports and uses SafeMath library for the _amount arithmetic operation (e.g., 'using SafeMath for uint256;' and '.add()' or '.mul()' in mintTokens).Affected if SafeMath is NOT used for arithmetic operations on _amount parameter
-
Check for explicit bounds validationInspect the mintTokens function body for conditional checks that validate _amount is within acceptable limits (e.g., 'require(_amount > 0 && _amount <= maxMintAmount)').Affected if NO bounds checking exists on the _amount parameter before arithmetic operations
-
Verify access control on mintTokensLook for modifier restrictions on the mintTokens function (e.g., 'onlyOwner', 'minterRole') that restrict who can call the function.Affected if NO access control modifier restricts who can call mintTokens, allowing any address to invoke it
The environment is affected if the SunContract token contract lacks SafeMath for arithmetic, has no bounds checking on _amount, and permits unrestricted access to the mintTokens 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 dataImplement the SafeMath library for arithmetic operations or add explicit bounds checking on the _amount parameter to prevent integer overflow. Additionally, add access controls to restrict who can call mintTokens.
- Consultation4.0 h
- Implementation4.0 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 $5,024.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2018-14576 — 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-2018-14576 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