Audit name:
[SCA] Alcazar | ERC20 | May2023
Date:
May 2, 2023
Table of Content
Introduction
We express our gratitude to the Alcazar team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
LEO is a lossless ERC20 token.
| title | content |
|---|---|
| Platform | BNB Chain |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | ERC20 |
| Timeline | 20/04/2023 - 01/05/2023 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://bscscan.com/token/0x56b331c7e3d68306f26e07492125f0faa9d95343→ |
| Commit | 0x56b331c7e3d68306f26e07492125f0faa9d95343 |
Review Scope
- Commit
- 0x56b331c7e3d68306f26e07492125f0faa9d95343
Audit Summary
10/10
n/a
10/10
3/10
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 | |
|---|---|
| Name | Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Alcazar |
| Audited By | Hacken |
| Changelog | 01/05/2023 – Initial Review |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Alcazar
- Audited By
- Hacken
- Changelog
- 01/05/2023 – Initial Review
System Overview
LEO is a lossless ERC20 token with the following components:
Context: This abstract contract provides utility functions to access the transaction context, such as the sender of the transaction and the transaction data. It is inherited by the LERC20 contract to make use of these functions.
Token: LERC20 is an ERC-20 token that supports lossless features. It mints the initial supply during deployment and does not allow further minting. It has the following attributes: \-Name: Leo. \-Symbol: LEO. \-Decimals: 18. \-Total supply: 1.000.000.000. \-Recovery Admin: 0xb2a8ea4b7b385746ca4ea9b9a10a0559721680d5. \-Admin: 0x2ff9d7be466f674c8640466a55ffdd02b3a00864. \-LossLess: 0xdbb5125ceeaf7233768c84a5df570aeecf0b4634. \-Timelock Period: 86400 (1 day).
Lossless: The token interacts with a lossless controller (ILosslessController) to help prevent fraudulent transactions. The lossless feature can be turned on or off by the recovery admin.
Privileged roles
Admin: The admin can be changed by the recovery admin and has the authority to change certain aspects of the lossless controller.
Recovery Admin: The recovery admin has several privileges, including transferring recovery admin ownership, accepting recovery admin ownership, setting the lossless admin, and managing the state of the lossless feature (turning it on or off).
Executive Summary
Documentation quality
The total Documentation quality score is 3 out of 10.
Functional requirements are not provided.
Technical description is partially provided.
Only the Lossless token generator is documented.
NatSpec is not provided.
The development environment is not described.
Code quality
The total Code quality score is 10 out of 10.
The code follows best practices.
The token generator from Lossless was used to deploy the code.
Test coverage
The project has less than 250 lines of code. Tests are not required.
Security score
Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 0 medium, and 1 low severity issues. Out of these, 0 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 9.3. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.
Risks
The LssController contract is not within the scope of the audit but has a significant impact on the audited contracts: \-it can transfer tokens from the user to itself. \-it has the ability to reject token transfers. \-it has the ability to reject changing allowances.
The LosslessController address defined in the contract points to the LosslessControllerV3.sol, the latest version of the LosslessController is V4, the contract uses an older version of the controller.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2023-1434 | Floating Pragma | unfixed | Low |
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 | |
|---|---|
| Whitepaper | Not provided |
| Requirements | Not provided |
| Technical Requirements | Partially provided |
Scope Details
- Whitepaper
- Not provided
- Requirements
- Not provided
- Technical Requirements
- Partially provided