Back to Blog

#7: ParaSpace Incident: A Race Against Time to Thwart the Industry's Most Critical Attack Yet

Code Auditing
February 17, 2024
5 min read
Key Insights
  • Root cause: cAPE’s rebasingIndex used total pooled APE (stakedAmount + pending rewards + buffer), which attackers could inflate via ApeCoinStaking.depositApeCoin() to boost collateral value.

  • Attack path: flash-loaned ~47,352 wstETH, borrowed/deposited

Background

On March 17, 2023, Paraspace (now Parallel Finance), an NFT lending platform, suffered a critical attack due to a vulnerability in its price oracle. Paraspace allows users to deposit NFTs and ERC-20 tokens as collateral to borrow ERC-20 tokens, enabling returns on NFTs without selling them.

Click here to read the tweet
Click here to read the tweet

A key feature of ParaSpace is ApeStaking, which auto-compounds APE rewards. Users staking APE receive cAPE tokens, a cToken representation of APE, which can be used as collateral to borrow assets like USDC and WETH. Depositing cAPE tokens grants pcAPE shares, whose collateral value is calculated by multiplying the pcAPE amount by its rebasingIndex.

The rebasingIndex is derived from the total pooled APE balance and total shares, as shown in the following code snippets:

function _scaledBalanceOf(address user, uint256 rebasingIndex)
    internal
    view
    returns (uint256)
{
    return super.scaledBalanceOf(user).rayMul(rebasingIndex);
}

function lastRebasingIndex() internal view override returns (uint256) {
  return ICApe(_underlyingAsset).getPooledApeByShares(WadRayMath.RAY);
}

function getPooledApeByShares(uint256 sharesAmount)
    public
    view
    returns (uint256)
{
    uint256 totalShares = _getTotalShares();
    if (totalShares == 0) {
        return 0;
    } else {
        return
            sharesAmount.mul(_getTotalPooledApeBalance()).div(totalShares);
    }
}

function _getTotalPooledApeBalance()
    internal
    view
    override
    returns (uint256)
{
    (uint256 stakedAmount, ) = apeStaking.addressPosition(address(this));
    uint256 rewardAmount = apeStaking.pendingRewards(
        APE_COIN_POOL_ID,
        address(this),
        0
    );
    return stakedAmount + rewardAmount + bufferBalance;
}

The _getTotalPooledApeBalance() function sums the staked APE tokens, pending rewards, and a buffer balance from the ApeCoinStaking contract.

Vulnerability Analysis

The vulnerability lies in the manipulation of the rebasingIndex, which artificially inflates the collateral value of cAPE tokens. Specifically, the depositApeCoin() function in the ApeCoinStaking contract increases the stakedAmount for a position. An attacker can exploit this by depositing APE tokens into the cAPE position, inflating the output of _getTotalPooledApeBalance() and thus the rebasingIndex.

function depositApeCoin(uint256 _amount, address _recipient) public {
    if (_amount < MIN_DEPOSIT) revert DepositMoreThanOneAPE();
    updatePool(APECOIN_POOL_ID);

    Position storage position = addressPosition[_recipient];
    _deposit(APECOIN_POOL_ID, position, _amount);

    apeCoin.transferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), _amount);

    emit Deposit(msg.sender, _amount, _recipient);
}

function _deposit(uint256 _poolId, Position storage _position, uint256 _amount) private {
  Pool storage pool = pools[_poolId];
  _position.stakedAmount += _amount;
  pool.stakedAmount += _amount.toUint96();
  _position.rewardsDebt += (_amount * pool.accumulatedRewardsPerShare).toInt256();
}

This design flaw allows the attacker to inflate the collateral value by depositing APE tokens through depositApeCoin() with cAPE as the recipient.

Attack Analysis

The attacker exploited this vulnerability using a flash loan attack in five key steps:

  1. Obtained a flash loan of approximately 47,352 wstETH and supplied about 46,018 wstETH to borrow cAPE via multiple contracts.
  2. Deposited roughly 12,880,000 cAPE tokens as collateral.
  3. Traded approximately 1,205 wstETH for about 492,124 APE tokens and withdrew 1,839,999 cAPE to APE tokens.
  4. Deposited 2,332,214 APE tokens into the cAPE position by calling ApeCoinStaking.depositApeCoin(), increasing the protocol’s stakedAmount from 851,662 to 3,183,876 (a 373% increase).
  5. Leveraged the inflated collateral to borrow large amounts of assets such as USDC and WETH for profit.

This manipulation of the pcAPE price via flash loans exploited the use of spot prices in the oracle calculation.

Get Started with Phalcon Security

Detect every threat, alert what matters, and block attacks.

Try now for free

Summary

The ParaSpace incident underscores the risks of oracle manipulation and flash loan attacks in DeFi protocols. It highlights the critical need for robust, manipulation-resistant price oracles and continuous security monitoring beyond pre-launch audits.

BlockSec’s Phalcon Security system demonstrated the value of active threat detection and prevention by automatically blocking the attack and protecting user assets. This incident serves as a reminder for DeFi protocols to implement comprehensive security measures, including smart contract audits, infrastructure audits, and real-time monitoring.

For more insights on DeFi security incidents and best practices, explore our Security Incident Library and consider our Smart Contract Audit and Infrastructure Audit services.

Explore MetaSleuth Investigation

Trace flows and build evidence for investigations

Try now for free

Best Security Auditor for Web3

Validate design, code, and business logic before launch

Sign up for the latest updates
Harmony Cross-Shard ONE Mint + ~$47M Key Losses | BlockSec Weekly
Security Insights

Harmony Cross-Shard ONE Mint + ~$47M Key Losses | BlockSec Weekly

During the week of August 10-16, 2026, 5 notable security incidents are featured, involving approximately $47M in quantified losses, with the detailed analysis focused on a chain-implementation flaw in the Harmony Layer-1. Harmony suffered unauthorized minting of native ONE through a cross-shard receipt replay: destination shards derived the receipt spent-marker from unauthenticated MerkleProof.ShardID and BlockNum fields instead of the signed source header, so an already-credited receipt could be replayed with no matching source-shard debit. Approximately 3.01T ONE was forged, but its nominal value far exceeds the token's market capitalization and is neither realizable nor confirmed realized loss, so Harmony is excluded from the total; the ~$47M came from private-key compromises (Unknown Whale Wallet ~$25M, Kite ~$14M, and Coinsbuy ~$7.9M) plus a Fox business-logic flaw (~$117K).

~$1.6M Lost: Moke Token, LpdFi Exploits | BlockSec Weekly
Security Insights

~$1.6M Lost: Moke Token, LpdFi Exploits | BlockSec Weekly

During the week of August 3-9, 2026, 2 notable security incidents on BNB Chain resulted in approximately $1.6M in total losses, both from price manipulation. The highlighted LpdFi incident (~$697K) reused the same manipulable PancakeSwap pair reserves for both order valuation and interest redemption, letting the attacker inflate a position's principal and reshape the pool to redeem an oversized interest claim. Moke Token (~$906K) combined a manipulable spot price with duplicated LP dividend accounting to claim inflated MOKE and collect the resulting BNB dividends multiple times.

COLDCARD Incident: When a Wallet's "Random" Seed Wasn't Random
Security Insights

COLDCARD Incident: When a Wallet's "Random" Seed Wasn't Random

A silent build-and-integration bug in COLDCARD firmware routed Bitcoin seed generation onto a software RNG fallback, whose weak randomness left wallet seeds recoverable offline. Because the weakness is in the seed itself, a firmware update cannot undo it; verified sweeps reached 1,405 BTC (~$91M) by 7 August 2026, with private-channel estimates as high as 2,055 BTC.

Best Security Auditor for Web3

Validate design, code, and business logic before launch. Aligned with the highest industry security standards.

BlockSec Audit