Introduction
We express our gratitude to the EQTY team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
EQTY is a capped ERC20 token with a maximum supply of 500 million, featuring burnability and controlled minting restricted to a designated bridge wallet within a limited timeframe.
Document | |
|---|---|
| Name | Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for EQTY |
| Audited By | , Ataberk Yavuzer |
| Approved By | |
| Website | https://eqty.me→ |
| Changelog | 1/10/2025 - Preliminary Report |
| 2/10/2025 - Preliminary Report | |
| Platform | Base |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | Fungible Token, ERC-20 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for EQTY
- Audited By
- , Ataberk Yavuzer
- Approved By
- Website
- https://eqty.me→
- Changelog
- 1/10/2025 - Preliminary Report
- 2/10/2025 - Preliminary Report
- Platform
- Base
- Language
- Solidity
- Tags
- Fungible Token, ERC-20
- Methodology
- https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Contract Address | https://basescan.org/token/0xc71f37d9bf4c5d1e7fe4bccb97e6f30b11b37d29→ |
Review Scope
Audit Summary
The system users should acknowledge all the risks summed up in the risks section of the report
{Finding_Table?columns=title,severity,status&setting.filter.type=Vulnerability}
Documentation quality
Functional and technical requirements are specified in the NatSpec comments.
Deployment and testing procedures are not included.
Code quality
The code leverages OpenZeppelin contracts for ERC-20, burnable, and capped supply functionality.
Implementation is minimal and well-structured, without unnecessary complexity.
No redundant logic or template leftovers were found.
Test coverage
Code coverage of the project is 0%.
No test files are implemented.
The test environment is not configured.
System Overview
EQTY is a simple ERC-20 token with a maximum supply of 500 million tokens. At deployment, a bridge wallet and a minting deadline are set. Only that wallet can mint, and only until the specified deadline is reached, after which minting is permanently disabled and the cap is fixed. Holders can also burn their tokens at any time to permanently reduce supply. Beyond these rules, EQTY behaves as a standard ERC-20 token, which is using 18 decimals, and is compatible with common wallets and DEXs, with no other ongoing admin role or upgrade controls defined in the current contract.
It has the following attributes:
Name: EQTY
Symbol: EQTY
Decimals: 18
Maximum supply cap: 500,000,000 tokens
Privileged roles
The
bridgeWallet, defined at deployment, holds the authority to mint EQTY tokens up to the fixed maximum cap of 500 million. This privilege is strictly time-bound and expires once the configuredmintDeadlineis reached, after which no additional minting is permitted.
Potential Risks
Centralized Control of Minting Process: Until the configured mintDeadline, all token issuance is solely controlled by the bridgeWallet. Compromise or misuse of this single key could trigger unintended mints (until the 500 Million cap is reached), and the chosen deadline directly determines how long this centralization persists.
Insufficient Multi-Signature Controls for Critical Functions: The mint function is gated by a single wallet address. Lack of multisig increases the risk of erroneous or malicious mint operations prior to the deadline.
Absence of Time-lock Mechanisms for Mint Actions: There is no enforced delay or review window for mint transactions. If the bridgeWallet key is compromised, large mints can occur immediately, until the maximum cap is reached.
Single Point of Failure and Control: Until the mintDeadline, supply expansion depends solely on the bridgeWallet. Key loss, compromise, or operator error could adversely impact token distribution and market trust.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2025-1321 | Misleading Constant Name For Supply Cap | accepted | Observation | |
| F-2025-1321 | Identical Token Name and Symbol May Lead to Confusion | accepted | Observation |
Appendix 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 | |
|---|---|
| Contract Address | https://basescan.org/token/0xc71f37d9bf4c5d1e7fe4bccb97e6f30b11b37d29→ |
| Whitepaper | N/A |
| Requirements | N/A |
| Technical Requirements | N/A |
Scope Details
- Whitepaper
- N/A
- Requirements
- N/A
- Technical Requirements
- N/A
Assets in Scope
Appendix 3. Additional Valuables
Additional Recommendations
The smart contracts in the scope of this audit could benefit from the introduction of automatic emergency actions for critical activities, such as unauthorized operations like ownership changes or proxy upgrades, as well as unexpected fund manipulations, including large withdrawals or minting events. Adding such mechanisms would enable the protocol to react automatically to unusual activity, ensuring that the contract remains secure and functions as intended.
To improve functionality, these emergency actions could be designed to trigger under specific conditions, such as:
Detecting changes to ownership or critical permissions.
Monitoring large or unexpected transactions and minting events.
Pausing operations when irregularities are identified.
These enhancements would provide an added layer of security, making the contract more robust and better equipped to handle unexpected situations while maintaining smooth operations.