Q1 2025 Web3 Security ReportAccess control failures led to $1.63 billion in losses
Discover report insights
  • Hacken
  • Audits
  • laika-ai
  • [SCA] Laika AI / ERC20 / Feb2024

Laika AI

Audit name:

[SCA] Laika AI / ERC20 / Feb2024

Date:

Mar 26, 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 Laika AI team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

LaikaAI is an ERC-20 token whose total supply is fixed at 1 billion of token units. According to the whitepaper →, it is conceived both as a governance and utility token.

titlecontent
PlatformEVM
LanguageSolidity
TagsERC-20
Timeline11/03/2024 - 29/03/2024
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/divinit7/laika-contract→
    Commit2f998a4

    Audit Summary

    Total10/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    100%

    Code Quality Score

    10/10

    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 Laika AI
    Audited ByGiovanni Franchi
    Approved ByYves Toiser
    Websitehttps://www.laika-ai.io→
    Changelog12/03/2024 - Preliminary Report && 29/03/2024 - Final Report

    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Laika AI
      Audited By
      Giovanni Franchi
      Approved By
      Yves Toiser
      Website
      https://www.laika-ai.io→
      Changelog
      12/03/2024 - Preliminary Report && 29/03/2024 - Final Report

    System Overview

    LaikaAI is an ERC-20 which consists of the following contract:

    LaikaAI  — ERC-20 token that mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed. LaikaAI adheres to ERC-2612 standard via inheritance of OpenZeppelin's ERC20Permit. This feature enables token holders to perform approvals through signatures, thereby facilitating gas-less transactions.  LaikaAI aligns with ERC-6372 and ERC-5805 standards by leveraging OpenZeppelin's ERC20Votes. This integration provides a mechanism for token-based voting. Additionally, the contract presents also burning and access control functionalities.

    It has the following attributes:

    • Name: Laika AI

    • Symbol: LKI

    • Decimals: 18

    • Total supply: 1 000 000 000 tokens.

    Privileged roles

    • No privileged roles are detected.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Functional requirements are present.

    • Technical description is complete.

    Code quality

    The total Code Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Solidity Style Guide is followed.

    • Best practice related to readability and code clarity are respected.

    Test coverage

    Code coverage of the project is 100% (branch coverage).

    • Test coverage is not required below 250 lines of code.

    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 10. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.

    Risks

    No risks are detected.

    Findings

    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2024-1435Solidity style guide violation
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-1376Unused Role
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-1375Solidity version 0.8.20 might not be supported in all chains due to push0 opcode
    accepted

    Observation
    F-2024-1374Large numeric literals should use underscores for readability
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-1373Floating 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
    LaikaAI.sol - contracts/LaikaAI.sol

    Disclaimer