Introduction
We express our gratitude to the Zeebu team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
Zeebu is a platform designed to revolutionize the telecom wholesale voice industry by creating a decentralized, transparent ecosystem for voice traffic exchange.
Document | |
|---|---|
| Name | Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Zeebu |
| Audited By | Farrukh Odinaev & Adam Idarrha |
| Approved By | Yves Toiser |
| Website | https://hacken.io→ |
| Changelog | 1/10/2024 - Preliminary Report & 1/10/2024 - Final Report |
| Platform | Ethereum, BSC |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | ERC20, Fungible Token, Proxy |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Zeebu
- Audited By
- Farrukh Odinaev & Adam Idarrha
- Approved By
- Yves Toiser
- Website
- https://hacken.io→
- Changelog
- 1/10/2024 - Preliminary Report & 1/10/2024 - Final Report
- Platform
- Ethereum, BSC
- Language
- Solidity
- Tags
- ERC20, Fungible Token, Proxy
- Methodology
- https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://testnet.bscscan.com/address/0xb9494eE5c37A44df967dc2826df9c9D2269aBB4A→ |
| Commit | n/a |
Review Scope
- Commit
- n/a
Audit Summary
The system users should acknowledge all the risks summed up in the risks section of the report
Documentation quality
The documentation is well-structured and provides a comprehensive description of the project.
Code quality
The code mostly adheres to Solidity Style Guide's recommendation.
Test coverage
Code coverage of the project is 0% (branch coverage).
No tests were provided.
Tests are not required below 250 lines of code.
System Overview
Zeebu — ERC20 token capped to a initial supply which is minted to the deployer at deploy time, it also implements burnable functionality.
It has the following attributes:
Name: ZEEBU
Symbol: ZBU
Decimals: 18
Total supply: capped to a value passed in the constructor
Privileged roles
There are no privilege roles in the contract.
Potential Risks
The token’s total supply is determined at deployment and cannot be verified beforehand, potentially limiting the project’s adaptability and economic model flexibility.
The total supply of the token is assigned to the deployer, which may allow them to have influence over the token's distribution and management, potentially undermining the project's decentralization and trust.
The initializer function lacks proper access control, making it vulnerable to frontrunning attacks, where malicious actors could call the function before intended parties, compromising the integrity of the token's deployment and governance.
Findings
No vulnerabilities were foundAppendix 1. Definitions
Severities
When auditing smart contracts, Hacken is using a risk-based approach that considers Likelihood, Impact, Exploitability and Complexity metrics to evaluate findings and score severities.
Reference on how risk scoring is done is available through the repository in our Github organization:
Severity | Description |
|---|---|
Critical | Critical vulnerabilities are usually straightforward to exploit and can lead to the loss of user funds or contract state manipulation. |
High | High vulnerabilities are usually harder to exploit, requiring specific conditions, or have a more limited scope, but can still lead to the loss of user funds or contract state manipulation. |
Medium | Medium vulnerabilities are usually limited to state manipulations and, in most cases, cannot lead to asset loss. Contradictions and requirements violations. Major deviations from best practices are also in this category. |
Low | Major deviations from best practices or major Gas inefficiency. These issues will not have a significant impact on code execution. |
Severity
- Critical
Description
- Critical vulnerabilities are usually straightforward to exploit and can lead to the loss of user funds or contract state manipulation.
Severity
- High
Description
- High vulnerabilities are usually harder to exploit, requiring specific conditions, or have a more limited scope, but can still lead to the loss of user funds or contract state manipulation.
Severity
- Medium
Description
- Medium vulnerabilities are usually limited to state manipulations and, in most cases, cannot lead to asset loss. Contradictions and requirements violations. Major deviations from best practices are also in this category.
Severity
- Low
Description
- Major deviations from best practices or major Gas inefficiency. These issues will not have a significant impact on code execution.
Potential Risks
The "Potential Risks" section identifies issues that are not direct security vulnerabilities but could still affect the project’s performance, reliability, or user trust. These risks arise from design choices, architectural decisions, or operational practices that, while not immediately exploitable, may lead to problems under certain conditions. Additionally, potential risks can impact the quality of the audit itself, as they may involve external factors or components beyond the scope of the audit, leading to incomplete assessments or oversight of key areas. This section aims to provide a broader perspective on factors that could affect the project's long-term security, functionality, and the comprehensiveness of the audit findings.
Appendix 2. Scope
The scope of the project includes the following smart contracts from the provided repository:
Scope Details | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://testnet.bscscan.com/address/0xb9494eE5c37A44df967dc2826df9c9D2269aBB4A→ |
| Commit | n/a |
| Whitepaper | https://zeebu.gitbook.io/zeebu-whitepaper-v2.0/uzhRGn79HnwkCMDad1EE→ |
| Requirements | n/a |
| Technical Requirements | n/a |
Scope Details
- Commit
- n/a
- Requirements
- n/a
- Technical Requirements
- n/a