USENIX Security2023Top-tier venue
Your Exploit is Mine: Instantly Synthesizing Counterattack Smart Contract
Zhuo Zhang, Zhiqiang Lin, Marcelo Morales, Xiangyu Zhang, Kaiyuan Zhang
Abstract
Smart contracts are susceptible to exploitation due to their unique nature. Despite efforts to identify vulnerabilities using fuzzing, symbolic execution, formal verification, and manual auditing, exploitable vulnerabilities still exist and have led to billions of dollars in monetary losses. To address this issue, it is critical that runtime defenses are in place to minimize exploitation risk. In this paper, we present STING, a novel runtime defense mechanism against smart contract exploits. The key idea is to instantly synthesize counterattack smart contracts from attacking transactions and leverage the power of Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) to front run attackers. Our evaluation with 62 real-world recent exploits demonstrates its effectiveness, successfully countering 54 of the exploits (i.e., intercepting all the funds stolen by the attacker). In comparison, a general front-runner defense could only handle 12 exploits. Our results provide a clear proof-of-concept that STING is a viable defense mechanism against smart contract exploits and has the potential to significantly reduce the risk of exploitation in the smart contract ecosystem.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Cited by top-tier papers14
- Nyx: Detecting Exploitable Front-Running Vulnerabilities in Smart ContractsWuqi Zhang, Zhuo Zhang, Qingkai Shi, Lu Liu et al.S&P 2024 · 23 citations
- Demystifying Invariant Effectiveness for Securing Smart ContractsZhiyang Chen, Ye Liu, Sidi Mohamed Beillahi, Yi Li et al.FSE 2024 · 15 citations
- Rolling in the Shadows: Analyzing the Extraction of MEV Across Layer-2 RollupsChristof Ferreira Torres, Albin Mamuti, Ben Weintraub, Cristina Nita-Rotaru et al.CCS 2024 · 12 citations
- SlimArchive: A Lightweight Architecture for Ethereum Archive NodesHang Feng, Yufeng Hu, Yinghan Kou, Runhuai Li et al.USENIX ATC 2024 · 11 citations
- Insecurity Through Obscurity: Veiled Vulnerabilities in Closed-Source ContractsSen Yang, Kaihua Qin, Aviv Yaish, Fan ZhangCCS 2026 · 3 citations
Builds on19
- Making Smart Contracts SmarterLoi Luu, Duc-Hiep Chu, Hrishi Olickel, Prateek Saxena et al.CCS 2016 · 2,306 citations
- Securify: Practical Security Analysis of Smart ContractsPetar Tsankov, Andrei Marian Dan, Dana Drachsler-Cohen, Arthur Gervais et al.CCS 2018 · 1,108 citations
- teEther: Gnawing at Ethereum to Automatically Exploit Smart ContractsJohannes Krupp, Christian RossowUSENIX Security 2018 · 345 citations
- Quantifying Blockchain Extractable Value: How dark is the forest?Kaihua Qin, Liyi Zhou, Arthur GervaisS&P 2022 · 336 citations
- sFuzz: an efficient adaptive fuzzer for solidity smart contractsTai D. Nguyen, Long H. Pham, Jun Sun, Yun Lin et al.ICSE 2020 · 260 citations
Related papers
- An Ever-evolving Game: Evaluation of Real-world Attacks and Defenses in Ethereum EcosystemShunfan Zhou, Zhemin Yang, Jie Xiang, Yinzhi Cao et al.USENIX Security 2020
- On Identifying Sound Conditions for Frontrunning ResistanceSebastian Holler, Anna Piscitelli, Jannik Albrecht, Stephan Dübler et al.CCS 2026
- SmarTest: Effectively Hunting Vulnerable Transaction Sequences in Smart Contracts through Language Model-Guided Symbolic ExecutionSunbeom So, Seongjoon Hong, Hakjoo OhUSENIX Security 2021 · 118 citations
- Summary-Based Symbolic Evaluation for Smart ContractsYu Feng, Emina Torlak, Rastislav BodíkASE 2020 · 15 citations
- Demystifying Exploitable Bugs in Smart ContractsZhuo Zhang, Brian Zhang, Wen Xu, Zhiqiang LinICSE 2023 · 80 citations
