TRUST Summit | Nov 3, 2025 | NYCWhere decision-makers define the next chapter of secure blockchain adoption.
Learn more

WhiteBIT

Audit name:

[SCA] WhiteBIT | WBT ERC Token | Apr2022

Date:

May 15, 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 WhiteBIT team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

WhiteBIT is Europe’s largest international centralized crypto-to-fiat exchange with over 2 million registered users and a team of 350+ members that meet all KYC and AML requirements.

titlecontent
PlatformEVM
LanguageSolidity
Timeline18/04/2022 - 19/08/2022
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/whitebit-exchange/wbt-token→
    Commit2ab92561d118bcf0801adeab5cddea86d813b61b

    Audit Summary

    Total9.4/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    6/10

    Code Quality Score

    4/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    10/10

    10Total Findings
    10Resolved
    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 WhiteBIT
    Audited ByHacken
    Websitehttps://whitebit.com→
    Changelog22/04/2022 – Initial Review
    03/05/022 - Second Review
    06/05/2022 - Third Review
    19/08/2022 - Fourth Review

    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for WhiteBIT
      Audited By
      Hacken
      Website
      https://whitebit.com→
      Changelog
      22/04/2022 – Initial Review
      03/05/022 - Second Review
      06/05/2022 - Third Review
      19/08/2022 - Fourth Review

    System Overview

    WhiteBIT is Europe’s largest international centralized crypto-to-fiat exchange with over 2 million registered users and a team of 350+ members that meet all KYC and AML requirements.

    Token  — simple ERC-20 token that mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. The token has the ability to add addresses to the black list, which will stop all operations with the address. For blacklisted addresses, it has the ability to destroy funds.

    It has the following attributes:

    • Name: WhiteBIT WBT

    • Symbol: WBT

    • Decimals: 8

    • Total supply: 400m tokens (300m for ERC network)

    Privileged roles

    • The owner of the WBT contract can add or remove addresses from the blacklist to lock funds.

    • The owner of the WBT contract can destroy funds for any blacklisted address.

    • The owner of the WBT contract has the ability to burn tokens.

    • The owner of the WBT contract can pause the contract, so all transfers would be stopped.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • The Customer provided superficial functional requirements and no technical requirements.

    Code quality

    The total Code Quality score is 4 out of 10.

    • Code duplications.

    • Limited number of unit tests provided.

    Architecture quality

    The architecture quality score is 6 out of 10.

    • Some files are copy-pasted from the OpenZeppelin repository with minimal or no changes.

    Security score

    Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 1 critical, 0 high, 1 medium, and 8 low severity issues, 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 9.4. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.

    Scoring Methodologyarrow right

    Findings

    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2022-1516Incorrect ERC20 Interface
    fixed

    Critical
    F-2024-1518Unnecessary SafeMath usage
    fixed

    Medium
    F-2022-1526The names are too similar
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1523The public function could be declared external
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1524Floating Pragma
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1522Boolean equality
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1521Unnecessary require
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1519Zero address is allowed
    fixed

    Low
    F-2022-1520Variable Shadowing
    fixed

    Low
    F-2024-1517Contract name typo
    fixed

    Low
    1-10 of 10 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/whitebit-exchange/wbt-token→
    Commit4d021a2029afdb3d4c22c0989c697c0469640bf9
    RequirementsProvided
    Technical RequirementsNot provided

    Contracts in Scope

    BlackList.sol - BlackList.sol
    ER20Detailed.sol - ER20Detailed.sol
    ERC20.sol - ERC20.sol
    ERC20Managable.sol - ERC20Managable.sol
    IERC20.sol - IERC20.sol
    Ownable.sol - Ownable.sol
    Pausable.sol - Pausable.sol
    SafeMath.sol - SafeMath.sol
    WbtToken.sol - WbtToken.sol

    Disclaimer