| name | storage-layout-safety |
| description | Type Thought-template (instantiate before use) - Trigger Pattern STORAGE_LAYOUT flag detected |
Skill: Storage Layout Safety
Type: Thought-template (instantiate before use)
Trigger Pattern: STORAGE_LAYOUT flag detected
Inject Into: depth-state-trace, depth-edge-case
Finding prefix: [SLS-N]
Rules referenced: R1, R4, R8, R10, R14
Covers: memory vs storage confusion, lost writes, proxy/upgrade storage collisions, inline assembly slot safety, and storage semantic corruption.
This vulnerability class exists ONLY on EVM - type-safe VMs (Move, Solana's Borsh model) enforce layout correctness at the runtime level. EVM's untyped 256-bit slot model permits silent corruption when layouts diverge.
Trigger Patterns
proxy|upgradeable|diamond|delegatecall|EIP1967|StorageSlot|
sstore|sload|assembly\s*\{|tstore|tload|reinitializer|
UUPSUpgradeable|TransparentUpgradeableProxy|BeaconProxy
Step 1: Storage Surface Inventory
Map the contract's persistent state surface before analyzing bugs:
| # | Variable | Type | Slot Assignment | Written By | Read By | Proxy-Relevant? |
|---|
For each state variable, determine:
- Sequential layout (compiler-assigned) vs manual slot (EIP-1967, custom
bytes32 constant)?
- Accessed via Solidity or via assembly
sstore/sload?
- For structs: trace slot computation (base + offset). For mappings:
keccak256(key . slot). For arrays: keccak256(slot) + index.
Tag: [TRACE:variable={name} → slot={computation} → writers={functions}]
Step 2: Memory vs Storage Confusion
For each function operating on structs or complex types:
2a. Reference Type Assignment
Trace every local variable of struct, array, or mapping type:
- Declared as
storage or memory?
- If
memory: is the function INTENDING to modify persistent state? If yes → lost write (copy modified in memory, never persisted).
- If
storage: does every code path that modifies the reference complete without early return before the write?
2b. Parameter Data Location
For each function accepting struct/array parameters:
- Is the parameter
memory or calldata?
- Does the function modify the parameter expecting persistence?
function update(MyStruct memory s) modifies s.field but s is a memory copy - original unchanged.
2c. Library Forwarding
For libraries called via using ... for:
- Does the library function take
storage or memory references?
- Mismatch between caller expectation and library signature → silent behavioral change.
Tag: [TRACE:function={name} → var={var} → location={memory/storage} → write_persisted={YES/NO}]
Step 3: Proxy Storage Layout Analysis
3a. Implementation vs Proxy Slot Overlap
- Map slots used by PROXY (admin, implementation, beacon).
- Map slots used by IMPLEMENTATION (state variables from slot 0).
- Any overlap? For EIP-1967: verify randomized slots match spec (
bytes32(uint256(keccak256("eip1967.proxy.implementation")) - 1)).
3b. Upgrade Layout Continuity
For each upgrade path (V1 → V2):
- V1 variables in SAME slots in V2? (no reordering, no type changes, no removed mid-sequence variables)
- New variables APPENDED after existing? (not inserted)
- Inheritance order identical? (different order = different slot assignment)
__gap storage slots reserved? New variables consuming gap correctly?
3c. Diamond / Namespaced Storage
For EIP-2535 or namespaced storage:
- Each facet uses unique namespace (keccak256 of distinct string)?
- Can two facets share the same namespace accidentally?
- Storage structs within namespace consistent across facet upgrades?
Tag: [TRACE:proxy_slot={N} → impl_var={name} → collision={YES/NO}]
Step 4: Assembly Storage Safety
For each inline assembly block using sstore or sload:
4a. Slot Computation
- Target slot hardcoded, constant-derived, or influenced by external input?
- If input-influenced → can attacker target ARBITRARY slots? Is slot value bounded/validated before
sstore?
4b. Value Encoding
- Correctly handles types < 32 bytes? (
sstore writes full 32 bytes - masking/shifting correct for packed slots?)
- For packed storage (multiple variables in one slot): does assembly preserve neighboring values?
4c. Transient Storage (EIP-1153)
If tstore/tload used:
- Correctly distinguished from
sstore/sload? (transient cleared after tx, permanent is not)
- Critical state accidentally stored with
tstore instead of sstore?
Tag: [BOUNDARY:user_input={MAX} → computed_slot={value} → target={what_gets_overwritten}]
4d. Hardcoded Offset into ABI-Encoded Data
Processing: ENUMERATE all calldataload/mload(add( sites with literal offsets + all byte-slicing with hardcoded N on dynamic-type data → PROCESS each against the criteria below → COVERAGE GATE before moving to Step 5.
Scope: Any code that reads from ABI-encoded data using hardcoded byte offsets rather than following offset pointers. This includes:
calldataload(N) in assembly (raw calldata)
mload(add(data, N)) in assembly (bytes memory/calldata variable)
data[N:] or data[N:N+32] byte-slicing in Solidity with hardcoded N
- Hardcoded offset arithmetic into nested
bytes fields after abi.decode
Grep: calldataload\( with a numeric literal, mload(add( with a literal offset on a bytes variable, fixed-offset byte-slicing on decoded bytes data.
| Read Site | Mechanism | Offset | Hardcoded? | Into Dynamic-Type Content? | Value Used For | Same Value Read via abi.decode? |
|---|
Root cause: ABI encoding is a convention, not enforced by the EVM. Dynamic types (bytes, string, T[]) use offset pointers — the content can be placed anywhere the pointer says. Hardcoded offsets assume canonical pointer values. A caller can supply non-canonical (but ABI-valid) encoding, making the hardcoded position contain attacker-controlled data instead of the expected field. This applies at every nesting level — top-level calldata, inner bytes fields, and nested structs.
Three impact categories:
HIGH/CRITICAL — Dual-read divergence: Hardcoded-offset read + the same value also read via abi.decode or pointer-following elsewhere. The two reads see different values. Enables: authorization bypass (auth sees attacker, execution sees victim), accounting divergence (check validates amount X, transfer uses amount Y).
MEDIUM — Single-read assumption violation: Hardcoded-offset read into dynamic-type content, value is security-critical, no dual-read exists but offset pointer is not validated as canonical. The contract reads attacker-controlled data as a trusted field. Latent Critical — any future addition of abi.decode on the same data creates dual-read divergence.
MEDIUM — Revert injection / DoS: Hardcoded-offset read lands on attacker-controlled data that triggers a revert (zero address, overflow, out-of-bounds). Legitimate calldata (via canonical encoding) would succeed, but attacker-crafted non-canonical encoding causes revert. Enables: griefing specific operations, front-run DoS if attacker can submit a malformed version of a victim's pending transaction.
MEDIUM — Hash divergence: Contract hashes raw calldata or portions of it (via assembly keccak256 over calldatacopy or manual packing) for signature verification, deduplication, or identity. Non-canonical encoding produces different hashes for logically identical inputs — or identical hashes for different inputs if overlapping tail pointers are used. Breaks: signature verification, replay protection, UserOp-style identity schemes.
Do not report if: The read targets a static-type parameter in the ABI head area (position is fixed regardless of offset pointers), or the value is not security-critical, or the contract validates that the offset pointer equals the expected canonical value before reading.
Additional note — memory vs calldata decoding inconsistency: Non-canonical calldata that decodes successfully via abi.decode from calldata may fail when the same bytes are copied to memory and re-decoded — the Solidity memory decoder is stricter. Code that copies calldata to memory then decodes should be checked for this asymmetry.
Tag: [TRACE:hardcoded_read({mechanism}, offset={N}) → dynamic_type_content={YES/NO} → dual_read={YES/NO} → impact={DIVERGENCE/ASSUMPTION/REVERT_DOS/HASH_DIVERGENCE}]
Step 5: Storage Semantic Corruption
5a. Deletion Consistency
When mapping entries or array elements are deleted:
- ALL auxiliary structures updated? (index arrays, counters, totals, role flags)
delete mapping[key] clears value but leaves stale entries in enumeration arrays?
5b. Bit Packing / Bitmap Operations
For manual bit packing:
- Every write correctly MASKs target bits without corrupting neighbors?
- Stale bits cleared on deletion? (
|= (1 << n) to set but = 0 instead of &= ~(1 << n) to clear → clears ALL bits)
5c. Uninitialized Storage Reads
Variables read before explicit write:
- Default value (0, address(0), false) a VALID state the code handles correctly?
require(configuredValue > 0) but never set → permanent DoS. if (admin == address(0)) { unrestricted } → open access until set.
Tag: [TRACE:delete={op} → auxiliary={state} → updated={YES/NO} → consumer={func} → reads_stale={YES/NO}]
Key Questions (must answer all)
- Does the contract use sequential layout, manual slots, or both?
- For proxy patterns: do implementation variables overlap with proxy admin slots?
- For assembly: can any
sstore target be influenced by external input?
- For struct operations: are all memory-reference modifications intentional (not lost writes)?
- For deletion: are all auxiliary data structures updated when primary state is removed?
Common False Positives
- EIP-1967 compliant: Standard randomized slots with verified computation → no collision
- Intentional memory copy: Read-only computation on a copy, no intent to persist → not a lost write
- Reserved gaps with matching inheritance:
__gap consumed correctly → no layout shift
- Audited library assembly: Well-tested library (e.g., OpenZeppelin
StorageSlot) → lower risk
Step Execution Checklist (MANDATORY)
| Section | Required | Completed? | Notes |
|---|
| 1. Storage Surface Inventory | YES | | All state variables with slots |
| 2. Memory vs Storage Confusion | IF structs/complex types | | Data location of all references |
| 3. Proxy Storage Layout | IF proxy/upgradeable | | Slot overlap, upgrade continuity |
| 4. Assembly Storage Safety | IF assembly with sstore/sload | | Slot computation, value encoding |
| 4d. Hardcoded Offset into ABI Data | IF calldataload/mload at hardcoded offset OR byte-slicing with literal offset on dynamic-type data | | Dual-read divergence, assumption violation, revert injection |
| 5. Storage Semantic Corruption | IF delete/restructure ops | | Auxiliary state consistency |