Bonk Cash Info
Inspired by the billion dollar juggernaut from which it garnered its name, Bonkch turns your ideas into $$$$$
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.
Ownership Privileges
- Open Trading but cannot close it
- Update Fee Receiver Address
- Include/Exclude wallets from fees
- Set fees up to 10%
Note - This Audit report includes a security analysis of the BonkCash Token smart contract. This analysis did not include functional testing (or unit testing) of the contract’s logic. Moreover, we only audited one token contract for the BonkCash team. Our team did not audit other contracts associated with the project. We recommend investors to do their own research before investing.
Files and details
Functions
public
/
State variables
public
/
Total lines
of code
/
Capabilities
Hover on items
/
Findings and Audit result
medium Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 medium Issue
Potential Honeypot
The contract could become a honeypot if the fee receiver addresses are set to a contract that doesn’t have the functionality to receive ETH. If done so, then the transfer function will fail every time, and the contract will be honeypotted.
Pending
#2 medium Issue
Transfer of Tokens without enabling Trade
The trading needs to be enabled by the owner in order for regular users to transfer tokens. On the contrary, the owner can authorize addresses manually and those addresses will be able to trade tokens. This functionality can be exploited in the following way, For example, there is a presale and the wallets used for the presale can be authorized by the owner. All the tokens obtained can be consolidated into a final wallet address and facilitate trading and selling of the acquired tokens, the last wallet address can be authorized.
optimization Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 optimization Issue
Public function that could be declared external
Use the `external` attribute for functions never called from the contract.
Pending
#2 optimization Issue
Uninitialized local variables
Initialize all the variables. If a variable is meant to be initialized to zero, explicitly set it to zero to improve code readability.
informational Issues | 2 findings
Pending
#1 informational Issue
Functions that are not used (dead-code)
Remove unused functions.
Pending
#2 informational Issue
Unused return values
Ensure that all the return values of the function calls are used.
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.