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

Audit name:

[SCA] CoinPays | Token Audit | May2024

Date:

Jun 11, 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 CoinPays team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

CoinPays is an ARC-20 token contract.

titlecontent
PlatformEVM
LanguageSolidity
TagsSolidity, ARC-20
Timeline27/05/2024 - 28/05/2024
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/CoinPaysIO/token-smart-contract→
    Commit3300f87
    Remediation Commit3c2e984

    Audit Summary

    Total9.8/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    0%

    Code Quality Score

    9/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    10/10

    5Total Findings
    4Resolved
    1Accepted
    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 CoinPays
    Audited ByOlesia Bilenka
    Approved ByAtaberk Yavuzer
    Websitehttps://coinpays.io/→
    Changelog27/05/2024 - Preliminary Report
    28/05/2024 - Final Report
    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for CoinPays
      Audited By
      Olesia Bilenka
      Approved By
      Ataberk Yavuzer
      Changelog
      27/05/2024 - Preliminary Report
      28/05/2024 - Final Report

    System Overview

    CoinPays is an ARC-20 project with the following contracts:

    CoinPays - is a simple ARC-20 token that mints 100000000 tokens to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. The name. symbol, decimals are defined during deployment.

    Ownable - is a contract ithat designates an account (usually the contract deployer) as the owner with exclusive access to specific functions.

    Context - is a contract that provides information about the current execution context, such as the sender of the transaction and its data.

    Privileged roles

    • The owner of the CoinPays and Ownable contract can transfer and renounce ownership.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Functional requirements are provided.

    • Technical description is provided.

    • Development environment description is provided.

    Code quality

    The total Code quality score is 9 out of 10.

    • The contracts and interfaces of the project are not separated into individual files and are contained within a single file.

    • The code mostly follows best practices and style guides.

    • The development environment is configured.

    Test coverage

    Code coverage of the project is 0% (branch coverage).

    • Tests are not provided.

    Security score

    Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 0 medium, and 1 low severity issues. Out of these, 1 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 9.8. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.

    Risks

    No certain risks were specified for given contract(s).

    Findings

    F-2024-3312Missing Balance and Allowance Verification in Transfers Causing Underflow Errors
    Status
    fixed
    Severity

    Low
    F-2024-3317Incorrect Error Message in Token Transfers
    Status
    fixed
    Severity

    Observation
    F-2024-3315Redundant Constructor in the Context Contract
    Status
    fixed
    Severity

    Observation
    F-2024-3314Redundant Ownable Inheritance Leading to Extra Gas Usage During Deployment
    Status
    accepted
    Severity

    Observation
    F-2024-3311Floating Pragma
    Status
    fixed
    Severity

    Observation
    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2024-3312Missing Balance and Allowance Verification in Transfers Causing Underflow Errors
    fixed

    Low
    F-2024-3317Incorrect Error Message in Token Transfers
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-3315Redundant Constructor in the Context Contract
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-3314Redundant Ownable Inheritance Leading to Extra Gas Usage During Deployment
    accepted

    Observation
    F-2024-3311Floating Pragma
    fixed

    Observation
    1-5 of 5 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
    CoinPays.sol - contracts › CoinPays.sol

    Disclaimer