- Hacken
- Audits
- blocksquare
- [SCA] Blocksquare | Staking | Jan2023
Audit name:
[SCA] Blocksquare | Staking | Jan2023
Date:
Mar 9, 2023
Table of Content
Introduction
We express our gratitude to the BlockSquare team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
Blocksquare is a technology company building the required infrastructure to transfer real estate assets to the internet.
| title | content |
|---|---|
| Platform | EVM |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | ERC20; Staking |
| Timeline | 06/01/2023 - 08/03/2023 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/blocksquare/LPStaking-Audit→ |
| Commit | 08f6760a66c8e490a550202a8d504d0adf1f21cc |
Review Scope
- Commit
- 08f6760a66c8e490a550202a8d504d0adf1f21cc
Audit Summary
10/10
69.23%
8/10
8/10
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 BlockSquare |
| Audited By | Hacken |
| Website | https://blocksquare.io/→ |
| Changelog | 13/01/2023 - Initial Review |
| 02/02/2023 - Second Review | |
| 09/02/2023 - Third Review | |
| 08/03/2023 - Fourth Review |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for BlockSquare
- Audited By
- Hacken
- Website
- https://blocksquare.io/→
- Changelog
- 13/01/2023 - Initial Review
- 02/02/2023 - Second Review
- 09/02/2023 - Third Review
- 08/03/2023 - Fourth Review
System Overview
LPStaking is a staking system allowing to stake ERC20 tokens (“LP”) for the reward in the form of another token (“Reward Token”).
Privileged roles
The Smart Contract has an Owner role, but its usage is limited to serving as a parameter for indexing events.
Executive Summary
Documentation quality
The total Documentation quality score is 8 out of 10.
Functional requirements are partially missing.
Technical description is provided.
The code is extensively documented using NatSpec.
Code quality
The total Code quality score is 8 out of 10.
Test coverage is insufficient.
CEI pattern violations are masked by nonReentrant.
Test coverage
Code coverage of the project is 69.23% (branch coverage).
Not all negative scenarios are covered.
Security score
Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 1 critical, 3 high, 4 medium, and 18 low severity issues. Out of these, 26 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 9.4. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.
Risks
No substantial risks were identified.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2023-0294 | Requirements Violation | fixed | Critical | |
| F-2023-0297 | Use of Hard-Coded Values | fixed | High | |
| F-2023-0296 | Denial of Service Vulnerability | fixed | High | |
| F-2023-0295 | Non-Finalized Code | fixed | High | |
| F-2023-0301 | Contradiction - Missing Validation | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2023-0300 | Unscalable Functionality - Bad Variable Naming | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2023-0299 | Best Practice Violation - Unchecked Transfer | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2023-0298 | Unscalable Functionality - Shadowing State Variables | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2023-0329 | Style Guide Violation | fixed | Low | |
| F-2023-0328 | Style Guide Violation | fixed | 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 | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/blocksquare/LPStaking-Audit→ |
| Commit | 08f6760a66c8e490a550202a8d504d0adf1f21cc |
| Whitepaper | Not provided |
| Requirements | Provided→ |
| Technical Requirements | Provided→ |