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

Veroblock

Audit name:

[SCA] Veroblock | ERC20 | Feb2023

Date:

Feb 22, 2023

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 Veroblock team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.

VEROBLOCK plans to introduce products that enable people to access the new digital market with minimal risks.

titlecontent
PlatformSolana
LanguageRust
TagsERC20
Timeline01/02/2023 - 21/02/2023
Methodologyhttps://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→

    Review Scope

    Repositoryhttps://github.com/igor756/erc20-chfp→
    Commit948bd0351dd8bc4bcd8e09e663ac28191f6b0571

    Audit Summary

    Total9.7/10
    Security Score

    10/10

    Test Coverage

    100%

    Code Quality Score

    9/10

    Documentation Quality Score

    9/10

    1Total Findings
    1Resolved
    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 Veroblock
    Audited ByHacken
    Changelog07/02/2023 – Initial Review
    21/02/2023 – Second Review

    • Document

      Name
      Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for Veroblock
      Audited By
      Hacken
      Changelog
      07/02/2023 – Initial Review
      21/02/2023 – Second Review

    System Overview

    CHFP TOKEN is a project that implements the following contracts:

    CHFPToken — simple ERC-20 token implementation using a custom contract, inheriting the RoleBasedAccess contract to manage authorization control. It allows minting until the variable _mintingFinished has its value changed to true.

    It has the following attributes:

    • Name: Swiss Franc and Properties.

    • Symbol: CHFP.

    • Decimals: 8.

    RoleBasedAccess — simple AccessControl implementation with two predefined roles:

    • Minter

    • Admin

    Privileged roles

    • Admin — can call the finishMinting function, that will change the value of _mintingFinished to true and minting will no longer be available. Can grant and revoke the Minter and Admin role.

    • Minter — can call the mint function and mint an arbitrary amount of tokens to an address.

    Executive Summary

    Documentation quality

    The total Documentation quality score is 9 out of 10.

    • Functional requirements are provided.

    • Technical description is provided.

    • Instructions to build, test and deploy are not provided.

    Code quality

    The total Code quality score is 9 out of 10.

    • The development environment is configured.

    • The code duplicates well known contracts (OpenZeppelin’s ERC20 and AccessControl) contracts instead of importing and extending them.

    Test coverage

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

    • Deployment and basic user interactions are covered with tests.

    • Different behaviors and features are covered with tests.

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

    Scoring Methodologyarrow right

    Risks

    Until the finishMinting() function is executed by the Admin, the Minter role accounts can mint an unlimited number of tokens with no limit to the total supply.

    The system relies on the security of the Admin and Minter private keys, which can impact the execution flow and security of the funds. We recommend those accounts to be at least ⅗ multi-sig.

    Findings

    F-2023-1373 Floating Pragma
    Status
    fixed
    Severity

    Low
    Code
    ―
    Title
    Status
    Severity
    F-2023-1373 Floating Pragma
    fixed

    Low
    1-1 of 1 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/igor756/erc20-chfp→
    Commit948bd0351dd8bc4bcd8e09e663ac28191f6b0571
    WhitepaperProvided
    RequirementsProvided
    Technical RequirementsProvided

    Contracts in Scope

    contracts
    access
    RoleBasedAccess.sol - contracts › access › RoleBasedAccess.sol
    CHFPToken.sol - contracts › CHFPToken.sol

    Disclaimer