Audit name:
[SCA] zkRace | ERC20 | Mar2024
Date:
Apr 15, 2024
Table of Content
Introduction
We express our gratitude to the zkRace team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
zkRace is deploying a new ERC20 token without burning/minting functionality.
| title | content |
|---|---|
| Platform | EVM |
| Language | Solidity |
| Tags | ERC20 |
| Timeline | 28/03/2024 - 02/04/2024 |
| Methodology | https://hackenio.cc/sc_methodology→ |
Review Scope | |
|---|---|
| Repository | https://github.com/W3Forge/erc20→ |
| Commit | 2bbbdbc |
Review Scope
- Repository
- https://github.com/W3Forge/erc20→
- Commit
- 2bbbdbc
Audit Summary
8/10
100%
10/10
8/10
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 zkRace |
| Audited By | Luis Arroyo |
| Approved By | Grzegorz Trawinski |
| Website | https://zkrace.com/→ |
| Changelog | 28/03/2024 - Preliminary Report |
| 02/04/2024 - Remediation Update |
Document
- Name
- Smart Contract Code Review and Security Analysis Report for zkRace
- Audited By
- Luis Arroyo
- Approved By
- Grzegorz Trawinski
- Website
- https://zkrace.com/→
- Changelog
- 28/03/2024 - Preliminary Report
- 02/04/2024 - Remediation Update
System Overview
W3Forge ERC20 Token is a ERC20 token with the following contracts:
Token — simple ERC-20 token that mints all initial supply to a deployer. Additional minting is not allowed.
It has the following attributes:
Name: zkRace
Symbol: ZERC
Decimals: 18
Total supply: 120000000e18 tokens
Privileged roles
The contract is not address privileged or has owner access.
Executive Summary
Documentation quality
The total Documentation Quality score is 8 out of 10.
No whitepaper.
No futures description.
No Tokenomics.
Code quality
The total Code Quality score is 10 out of 10.
Test coverage
Code coverage of the project is 100% (branch coverage), with a mutation score of 100%.
Security score
Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 2 medium, and 0 low severity issues, leading to a Security score of 8 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 8.4. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.
Risks
Existing issues that could cause distrust in the community due to over-centralization concerns.
Findings
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| F-2024-1814 | Lack of token distribution leads to centralization problems | accepted | Medium | |
| F-2024-1810 | Total supply is not hardcoded | accepted | Medium | |
| F-2024-1822 | Floating Pragma | accepted | Observation | |
| F-2024-1819 | Update import usages to add modularity | accepted | Observation | |
| F-2024-1818 | Constructor can be marked as payable | accepted | Observation |
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/W3Forge/erc20→ |
| Commit | 2bbbdbc7eeb1a7a398a84c257a90d6185db4b204 |
| Whitepaper | Not provided |
| Requirements | Not provided |
| Technical Requirements | Not provided |
Scope Details
- Repository
- https://github.com/W3Forge/erc20→
- Commit
- 2bbbdbc7eeb1a7a398a84c257a90d6185db4b204
- Whitepaper
- Not provided
- Requirements
- Not provided
- Technical Requirements
- Not provided