Q1 2026 Security & Compliance Report44 incidents, $482M in losses, insights from 11 industry leaders.
Read the report

Audit name:

[SCA] Lif3 | ERC20 | Aug2022

Date:

Aug 31, 2022

Table of Content

Introduction
Audit Summary
Document Information
System Overview
Executive Summary
Findings
Appendix 1. Severity Definitions
Appendix 2. Scope
Disclaimer

Want a comprehensive audit report like this?

Introduction

We express our gratitude to the Lif3 team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

On Tomb Chain, Lif3 is an ERC-20 token that has snapshot extension and mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed.

titlecontent
PlatformFantom, Tomb Chain
LanguageSolidity
TagsErc20
Timeline26/07/2022 – 30/08/2022
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/qftg/lshare-contracts/
    https://github.com/qftg/lif3-contracts/
    Commit303ed1bf5fb24e0f3a22d8cbfe101d673e3c0c51
    581be6e36be0cfbd6bebd3cba39eb442a2a3424d

    Audit Summary

    Total9.6/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    10/10

    Code Quality Score

    10/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    6/10

    1Total Findings
    1Resolved
    0Accepted
    0Mitigated

    The system users should acknowledge all the risks summed up in the risks section of the report

    Document Information

    This report may contain confidential information about IT systems and the intellectual property of the Customer, as well as information about potential vulnerabilities and methods of their exploitation.

    The report can be disclosed publicly after prior consent by another Party. Any subsequent publication of this report shall be without mandatory consent.

    Document

    NameSmart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Lif3
    Audited ByHacken
    Approved ByHacken
    Changelog28/07/2022 – Initial Review
    30/08/2022 – Second Review
    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Lif3
      Audited By
      Hacken
      Approved By
      Hacken
      Changelog
      28/07/2022 – Initial Review
      30/08/2022 – Second Review

    System Overview

    Tomb is a project that contains two ERC20 tokens:

    LIF3 — simple ERC-20 token that has snapshot extension and mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. It has the following attributes:

    • Name: LIF3.

    • Symbol: LIF3.

    • Decimals: 18.

    • Total supply: 8888888888 tokens.

    LShare — simple ERC-20 token that has snapshot extension and mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. It has the following attributes:

    • Name: LSHARE.

    • Symbol: LSHARE.

    • Decimals: 18.

    • Total supply: 70000 tokens.

    Privileged roles

    • The owner of the LIF3 and LSHARE contracts can snapshot the contract or transfer the ownership.

    • All of the LIF3 and LSHARE are initially minted to the owner.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation quality score is 6 out of 10.

    • A brief explanation of Lif3 contract was in the readme file.

    • Minor technical documentation is provided in the readme of the LShare repo.

    • No whitepaper was provided.

    Code quality

    The total Code quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Unit tests were provided and running successfully.

    • Code mostly follows the style guidelines.

    • Test coverage is 100%.

    Test coverage

    The total Architecture quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • As a development environment, Hardhat is used.

    • It is implementing testing and strongly documented local development environment.

    Security score

    Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 0 medium, and 1 low severity issues. Out of these, 1 issues have been addressed and resolved, leading to a security score of 10 out of 10.

    All identified issues are detailed in the “Findings” section of this report.

    Summary

    The comprehensive audit of the customer's smart contract yields an overall score of 9.6. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, architecture quality, and security aspects of the project.

    Findings

    Code
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2022-1955Floating pragma
    fixed

    Low
    1-1 of 1 findings

    Identify vulnerabilities in your smart contracts.

    Appendix 1. Severity Definitions

    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, do not affect security score but can affect code quality score.
    • 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, do not affect security score but can affect code quality score.

    Appendix 2. Scope

    The scope of the project includes the following smart contracts from the provided repository:

    Scope Details

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/qftg/lshare-contracts/
    https://github.com/qftg/lif3-contracts/
    Commit303ed1bf5fb24e0f3a22d8cbfe101d673e3c0c51
    581be6e36be0cfbd6bebd3cba39eb442a2a3424d
    WhitepaperNot Provided
    RequirementsNot provided
    Technical RequirementsProvided

    Contracts in Scope

    contracts
    LIF3.sol - contracts › LIF3.sol
    LShare.sol - contracts › LShare.sol

    Disclaimer