Audit name:
[SCA] RedFox | Bridge V2 | Nov2021
Date:
Dec 14, 2021
Table of Content
Introduction
We express our gratitude to the RedFox team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
RFOX's vision is to be the global leader in immersive metaverse experiences focused on retail, media, gaming & rewards. RFOX token is the multichain digital asset that fuels the RFOX metaverse ecosystem and its immersive technology.
| title | content |
|---|---|
| Platform | EVM |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | Brigde |
| Timeline | 22/11/2021 - 15/12/2021 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/RFL-Valt/eth-bridge-contract→ |
| Commit | 61d530d50229e57f73434eae421abd23cb32685c |
Review Scope
- Commit
- 61d530d50229e57f73434eae421abd23cb32685c
Audit Summary
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 RedFox |
| Audited By | Hacken |
| Website | https://www.rfox.com/→ |
| Changelog | 24/11/2021 - Initial Audit |
| 02/12/2021 - Second Review | |
| 15/12/2021 - Third Review |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for RedFox
- Audited By
- Hacken
- Website
- https://www.rfox.com/→
- Changelog
- 24/11/2021 - Initial Audit
- 02/12/2021 - Second Review
- 15/12/2021 - Third Review
Risks
Smart contracts within the scope were manually reviewed and analyzed with static analysis tools.
The audit report contains all found security vulnerabilities and other issues in the reviewed code.
As a result of the audit, security engineers found 1 medium and 7 low severity issues.
After the second review security engineers found that all issues were addressed.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2022-1903 | Very low tests coverage | fixed | Medium | |
| F-2022-1910 | A public function that could be declared external | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1909 | A public function that could be declared external | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1908 | A public function that could be declared external | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1907 | Boolean equality | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1906 | Missing events | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1905 | The imported contract was never used. | fixed | Low | |
| F-2022-1904 | Inconsistency of naming and declaring | 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/RFL-Valt/eth-bridge-contract→ |
| Commit | 61d530d50229e57f73434eae421abd23cb32685c |
| Whitepaper | Not provided |
| Requirements | Provided |
| Technical Requirements | Not provided |
Scope Details
- Commit
- 61d530d50229e57f73434eae421abd23cb32685c
- Whitepaper
- Not provided
- Requirements
- Provided
- Technical Requirements
- Not provided