Q2 2026 Security & Compliance Report67 incidents, $764M in losses, 88% from operational failures.
Get the report →
Bixos logo

Bixos

Audit name:

[SCA] Bixos | BEP20 | Feb2024

Date:

Feb 27, 2024

Table of Content

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

Want a comprehensive audit report like this?

Introduction

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

Bixos is a simple BEP-20 token, which mints all of the total supply to the deployer.

titlecontent
PlatformEVM
LanguageSolidity
TagsBEP-20
Timeline26/02/2024 - 27/02/2024
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/bixos/ubxstoken-smartcontract→
    Commitf5f5329

    Audit Summary

    Total9.6/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    100%

    Code Quality Score

    8/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    10/10

    1Total Findings
    0Resolved
    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 Bixos
    Audited ByGiovanni Franchi
    Approved ByYves Toiser
    Websitehttps://bixos.com/→
    Changelog26/02/2024 - Preliminary Report

    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Bixos
      Audited By
      Giovanni Franchi
      Approved By
      Yves Toiser
      Website
      https://bixos.com/→
      Changelog
      26/02/2024 - Preliminary Report

    System Overview

    Bixos is a simple BEP-20 with the following contract:

    1_UbxsToken  — BEP-20 token that mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. Total supply is not defined in a constant but passed as a constructor argument.

    It has the following attributes:

    • Name: UBXS Token

    • Symbol: UBXS

    • Decimals: 6

    • Total supply: Defined at deploy time.

    Privileged roles

    • No privileged roles detected.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Functional requirements are provided.

    • Technical description is provided.

    Code quality

    The total Code Quality score is 8 out of 10.

    • Naming convention best practises are violated.

    • The development environment is configured.

    Test coverage

    Code coverage of the project is 100%.

    • Test coverage is not required for projects below 250 loc.

    Security score

    Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 0 medium, and 0 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 9.6. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.

    Scoring Methodologyarrow right

    Risks

    The total supply of the token is determined during the deployment. It cannot be verified until the contract is deployed.

    All tokens are minted to a single address. The secureness of the supply depends on the secureness of key storage.

    The whitepaper → mentions many functionalities that are not implemented in the present scope such as an allocation program and a tokenomics strategy.

    Findings

    F-2024-1044Non-Compliance with Naming Conventions for Contract and File Names
    Status
    unfixed
    Severity

    Observation
    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2024-1044Non-Compliance with Naming Conventions for Contract and File Names
    unfixed

    Observation
    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:

    Contracts in Scope

    contracts
    1_UbxsToken.sol - contracts › 1_UbxsToken.sol

    Disclaimer