Q1 2025 Web3 Security ReportAccess control failures led to $1.63 billion in losses
Discover report insights
  • Hacken
  • Audits
  • lyvely
  • [SCA] Lyvely / ERC20 / Feb2024
Lyvely logo

Lyvely

Audit name:

[SCA] Lyvely / ERC20 / Feb2024

Date:

Mar 10, 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 Lyvely team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

Lyvely is an innovative solution revolutionizing the future of online monetization for content creators, freelancers, and self-employed entrepreneurs, offering a dynamic platform for individuals to thrive in the digital economy

titlecontent
PlatformEVM
LanguageSolidity
TagsERC20
Timeline22/02/2024 - 23/02/2024
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/Cypher-Capital/lyvely-erc20-token→
    Commit4f84eac4425fc33c7a364ca2caebc0a2533d361a

    Audit Summary

    Total10/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    100%

    Code Quality Score

    10/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    10/10

    3Total Findings
    3Resolved
    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 Lyvely
    Audited ByOleksii Haponiuk
    Approved ByYves Toiser
    Websitehttp://lyvely.com→
    Changelog26/02/2024 - Preliminary Report & 27/02/2024 - Final report

    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Lyvely
      Audited By
      Oleksii Haponiuk
      Approved By
      Yves Toiser
      Website
      http://lyvely.com→
      Changelog
      26/02/2024 - Preliminary Report & 27/02/2024 - Final report

    System Overview

    Lyvely is a monetization platform with the following contracts:

    LyvelyToken  — simple ERC-20 token that mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed.

    It has the following attributes:

    • Name: LyvelyToken

    • Symbol: LVLY

    • Decimals: 18

    • Total supply: 1 billion tokens.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    • Functional requirements are provided on the project's website (http://lyvely.com).

    • Technical description is provided in the README of the project.

    Code quality

    The total Code Quality score is 10 out of 10.

    Test coverage

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

    • Deployment and basic user interactions are covered with tests.

    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

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

    Findings

    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2024-1017Use of forge update might cause use of imports from development branches instead of the latest stable release
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-1016Solidity version 0.8.20 might not work on all chains due to PUSH0 opcode
    fixed

    Observation
    F-2024-1014Floating pragma
    fixed

    Observation
    1-3 of 3 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:

    Scope Details

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/Cypher-Capital/lyvely-erc20-token→
    Commit (initial)28f921c8e5e7d93debf6fe4733587ae031874800
    Commit (final)4f84eac4425fc33c7a364ca2caebc0a2533d361a
    WhitepaperN/A
    Requirementshttp://lyvely.com→
    Technical Requirementshttps://github.com/Cypher-Capital/lyvely-erc20-token/blob/main/README.md→

    Contracts in Scope

    src
    LyvelyToken.sol - src/LyvelyToken.sol
    script
    DeployLyvelyToken.s.sol - script/DeployLyvelyToken.s.sol

    Disclaimer