BattleForTen Info
Battle For TEN is a double-currency online game. The Dragon Eggs is the currency that is used to purchase Equipment and Abilities. In addition, the official token of Battle for TEN - $BFT is also an in-game currency that can be used to purchase champions and also be used as a cryptocurrency aside from the game. There are multiple ways to earn $BFT. The daily BFT reward for 5 PvP games is the easiest way to earn $BFT tokens. Depending on the level of the champion that you are playing with $BFT rewards will change accordingly.
Overall Score
Real-Time Threat Detection
Real-time threat detection, powered by Cyvers.io, is currently not
activated
for this project.
This advanced feature provides continuous monitoring and instant alerts to safeguard your assets from potential security threats. Real-time detection enhances your project's security by proactively identifying and mitigating risks.
For more information, click here.
TrustNet DataPulse
Summary and Final Words
No crucial issues found
The contract does not contain issues of high or medium criticality. This means that no known vulnerabilities were found in the source code.
Contract owner cannot mint
It is not possible to mint new tokens.
Contract owner cannot blacklist addresses.
It is not possible to lock user funds by blacklisting addresses.
Contract owner cannot set high fees
The fees, if applicable, can be a maximum of 25% or lower. The contract can therefore not be locked. Please take a look in the comment section for more details.
Contract cannot be locked
Owner cannot lock any user funds.
Token cannot be burned
There is no burn function within the contract.
Ownership is not renounced
Contract can be manipulated by owner functions.
Scope of Work
Final Words
The following provides a concise summary of the audit report, accompanied by insightful comments from the auditor. This overview captures the key findings and observations, offering valuable context and clarity.
Owner Privileges:
- Include/Exclude accounts from the reward and fee
- Set Minimum token to swap at any amount because there are no limits/range
- Set marketing wallet and enable/disable swap and liquify
Files and details
Functions
public
/
State variables
public
/
Total lines
of code
/
Capabilities
Hover on items
/
Findings and Audit result
low Issues | 4 findings
Pending
#1 low Issue
Local variables shadowing (shadowing-local)
Rename the local variables that shadow another component.
Pending
#2 low Issue
Missing Events Arithmetic (events-maths)
Emit an event for critical parameter changes.
Pending
#3 low Issue
Floating Pragma
The current pragma Solidity directive is “^0.8.0". Contracts should be deployed with the same compiler version and flag that they have been tested thoroughly. Locking the pragma helps to ensure that contracts do not accidentally get deployed using other versions
Pending
#4 low Issue
Contract doesn’t import npm packages from source (like OpenZeppelin etc.)
We recommend importing all packages from npm directly without flattening the contract. Functions could be modified or can be susceptible to vulnerabilities
optimization Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 optimization Issue
State variables that could be declared constant (constable-states)
Add the `constant` attributes to state variables that never change.
Pending
#2 optimization Issue
Public function that could be declared external (external-function)
Use the `external` attribute for functions never called from the contract.
informational Issues | 3 findings
Pending
#1 informational Issue
Functions that are not used (dead-code)
Remove unused functions.
Pending
#2 informational Issue
Function initializing state variables (function-init-state)
Remove any initialization of state variables via non-constant state variables or function calls. If variables must be set upon contract deployment, locate initialization in the constructor instead.
Pending
#3 informational Issue
Unused state variables (unused-state)
Remove unused state variables.
This audit encompasses the evaluation of the files listed below, each verified with a SHA-1 Hash. The team referenced above has provided the necessary files for assessment.
The auditing process consists of the following systematic steps:
A file with a different Hash has been intentionally or otherwise modified after the security review. A different Hash may indicate a changed condition or potential vulnerability that was not within the scope of this review.