Reproduced Exploit
Hyperhyper — worthless options lock collateral with no unlock
Opening a call locks sizeUa of the underlying. The only function that can release that balance is exerciseOrLiquidate, and it runs only when isPayoffAvailable is true: the option is profitable (payoff > 0) and the timestamp is inside [maturity, maturity + exerciseWindow]. A worthless option is insi…
Chain
Other
Category
logic
Date
Mar 2025
Source
AuditVault
EVM Playground
Source-level debugger — step opcodes and Solidity in sync
The attack is replayed in an in-browser EVM preloaded with the exact dumped fork state. The execution tree shows every call; step by Solidity line or by opcode across all depths — source, Stack, Memory, Storage, Balances (native / ERC-20 / NFT), Transient storage and Return value stay in sync. Click a tree node, opcode, or source line to jump. No backend, no live RPC.
Source & credit. Reproduction of a public audit finding curated by AuditVault — the original finding: 57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti. Standalone Foundry PoC and full write-up: 57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti_exp in the
evm-hack-registrymirror.
Vulnerability classes: vuln/logic/missing-check · vuln/logic/state-update
Key info#
| Protocol | Hyperhyper |
| Finding | Pashov Audit Group C-01, AuditVault 57735 |
| Vulnerable code | PositionInteractionFacet._lockLiquidity and StrategyView.isPayoffAvailable |
| Harm | 1000 underlying tokens locked in the pool. The only exit releases 0. |
| Chain | local synthetic |
TL;DR#
Opening a call locks sizeUa of the underlying. The only function that can release that balance is exerciseOrLiquidate, and it runs only when isPayoffAvailable is true: the option is profitable (payoff > 0) and the timestamp is inside [maturity, maturity + exerciseWindow]. A worthless option is inside the window here and still fails the check, so exercise returns 0. The pool has no other withdraw. 1000 tokens stay in the pool and the depositor's balance is 0. The control adds unlockWorthless, which returns the same 1000.
The vulnerable code#
function _lockLiquidity(uint8 opType, uint256 size) internal {
if (opType == CALL) {
// @> VULN: locked underlying has no unlock when payoff is 0 or the window is missed.
lockedToken = lockedToken + size;
} else if (opType == PUT) {
lockedUsd = lockedUsd + size;
}
}
function isPayoffAvailable(uint256 payoff) public view returns (bool) {
bool inWindow = block.timestamp >= maturity && block.timestamp <= maturity + exerciseWindow;
bool profitable = payoff > 0;
return inWindow && profitable;
}
function exerciseOrLiquidate(uint256 payoff) external returns (uint256 released) {
if (!isPayoffAvailable(payoff)) {
return 0;
}
// release path — not reached when payoff is 0
}
The report's isPayoffAvailable also requires the caller to be the position owner. That check is true in this reduction. The failing conjunct is payoff > 0. The same function fails when the timestamp is past maturity + exerciseWindow; that second case needs a later block, so this run uses the worthless-option case, which is in the report and fits one block.
Root cause#
Lock and unlock are not paired. _lockLiquidity runs on open. The matching decrease of lockedToken exists only on the exercise path, and exercise is gated on a positive payoff inside a finite window. An option that expires worthless, or that nobody exercises in time, never takes that path. Nothing else moves the tokens.
Preconditions#
A call is opened with sizeUa = 1000 underlying. Payoff is 0. block.timestamp is maturity (1), and the window is 7 days, so the position is inside the window. No role is required to observe the failed withdraw.
Attack walkthrough#
- The depositor approves the pool and
openCall(1000 ether)pulls the tokens in. - The call branch sets
lockedTokento 1000. isPayoffAvailable(0)is false: the window check passes,payoff > 0does not.exerciseOrLiquidate(0)returns 0 and does not transfer.- The pool still holds 1000. The depositor holds 0.
releasedis 0.
The vulnerable pool has no other withdraw, so the 1000 cannot move. The control is a pool with the same failed exercise plus unlockWorthless. After that call the depositor holds 1000 again and the pool holds 0.
Diagrams#
Impact#
The liquidity provider cannot withdraw 1000 underlying. The tokens are not paid to a counterparty; they sit in the pool with lockedToken == 1000 and no successful release. The report also describes an attacker opening many cheap options and never exercising, which locks the same way. This run is one worthless call for a measured 1000.
Remediation#
Add an unlock for options whose payoff is 0 or whose exercise window has passed, and call it from a permissionless settle path. Do not leave lockedToken decreasable only from exerciseOrLiquidate.
How to reproduce#
cd 57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti_exp
forge test -vv
Sources#
- AuditVault finding: https://github.com/Auditware/AuditVault/blob/main/findings/57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti.md
- Pashov report: https://github.com/pashov/audits/blob/master/team/md/Hyperhyper-security-review_2025-03-30.md
Sources & further analysis#
Reproductions & code
- Standalone PoC + full trace: 57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti_exp (evm-hack-registry mirror).
- AuditVault finding: 57735-c-01-permanent-lock-due-to-missing-unlock-mechanism-for-opti.
Alerts & third-party analyses
These dashboards index community alerts tweets, post-mortems, and independent write-ups. Reach them through the protocol name above to cross-check this reproduction against other analyses.