Introduction
We express our gratitude to the Muon team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
Muon is a stateless decentralized oracle network (DON) that enables dApps to make their off-chain components decentralized. By incorporating Muon, the manner in which decentralized applications store, process, and access data will be fundamentally transformed, redefining the landscape of decentralized systems.
| title | content |
|---|---|
| Platform | EVM |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | ERC20; ERC721 |
| Timeline | 10/07/2023 - 09/08/2023 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/muon-protocol/muon-tokenomics-contracts→ |
| Commit | 78d591d |
Review Scope
- Commit
- 78d591d
Audit Summary
10/10
92.86%
9/10
7/10
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 Muon |
| Audited By | Hacken |
| Website | https://www.muon.net→ |
| Changelog | 17/07/2023 - Initial Review |
| 09/08/2023 - Second Review |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Muon
- Audited By
- Hacken
- Website
- https://www.muon.net→
- Changelog
- 17/07/2023 - Initial Review
- 09/08/2023 - Second Review
System Overview
Token – an upgradable, pausable, and burnable ERC20 token smart contract, with specific roles for pausing the contract and minting new tokens.
BondedToken – a custom implementation of an ERC721 (non-fungible token) smart contract that provides functionalities for minting, burning, and transferring tokens. Additionally, it has unique features such as token whitelisting, locking of assets in tokens, as well as splitting and merging tokens while maintaining locked assets.
PION – an ERC20 token based on Token. It has the following attributes:
Name: PioneerNetwork
Symbol: PION
Decimals: 18
Total supply: unlimited
BondedPION – an ERC721 token based on BondedToken. IToken – an interface for ERC20 tokens.
Privileged roles
Token.sol:
Admin:
Manage other roles throughout users.
Pauser:
Pause and unpause smart contract.
Minter:
Mint unlimited amount of tokens.
BondedToken.sol:
Owner:
Pause and unpause smart contract. Set tokens whitelist, enable/disable public transfers, set treasury address.
Admin:
Manage other roles throughout users.
Transferable address:
Users with only this role can receive and send tokens.
Executive Summary
Documentation quality
The total Documentation quality score is 7 out of 10.
Functional requirements have some gaps:
No roles description.
Project overview is detailed.
All interactions are described.
Technical description is inadequate:
Run instructions are provided.
NatSpec is sufficient.
Code quality
The total Code quality score is 9 out of 10.
Best practice violations.
Test coverage
Code coverage of the project is 92.86%.
Tests are provided.
Negative cases coverage is present.
Interactions by several users are tested.
Security score
Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 4 medium, and 1 low severity issues. Out of these, 2 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 9.2. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.
Risks
No potential security risks were found during the audit research.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2023-0245 | CEI Pattern Violation | mitigated | Medium | |
| F-2023-0244 | Missing Storage Gaps | mitigated | Medium | |
| F-2023-0243 | Coarse-Grained Authorization Model; Inefficient Gas Modeling | mitigated | Medium | |
| F-2023-0242 | Denial of Service; Inefficient Gas Modeling | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2023-0246 | Missing Events | fixed | Low | |
| I-2023-0067 | Missing Event Indexes | unfixed | Observation | |
| I-2023-0066 | Unnecessary Value Assignment | fixed | Observation | |
| I-2023-0065 | Inefficient Gas Modeling | fixed | Observation | |
| I-2023-0064 | Solidity Style Guide Violation: mixedCase in State Variables Names | fixed | Observation | |
| I-2023-0063 | Boolean Equality | fixed | Observation |
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 | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/muon-protocol/muon-tokenomics-contracts→ |
| Commit | 78d591d |
| Whitepaper | Provided→ |
| Requirements | Provided→ |
| Technical Requirements | Provided→ |