TrustNet Score
The TrustNet Score evaluates crypto projects based on audit results, security, KYC verification, and social media presence. This score offers a quick, transparent view of a project's credibility, helping users make informed decisions in the Web3 space.
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.
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 burning within the contract without any allowances
Ownership is not renounced
The owner retains significant control, which could potentially be used to modify key contract parameters.
Scope of Work
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:
- Specification Review: Analyze the provided specifications, source code, and instructions to fully understand the smart contract's size, scope, and functionality.
- Manual Code Examination: Conduct a thorough line-by-line review of the source code to identify potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement.
- Specification Alignment: Ensure that the code accurately implements the provided specifications and intended functionalities.
- Test Coverage Assessment: Evaluate the extent and effectiveness of test cases in covering the codebase, identifying any gaps in testing.
- Symbolic Execution: Analyze the smart contract to determine how various inputs affect execution paths, identifying potential edge cases and vulnerabilities.
- Best Practices Evaluation: Assess the smart contracts against established industry and academic best practices to enhance efficiency, maintainability, and security.
- Actionable Recommendations: Provide detailed, specific, and actionable steps to secure and optimize the smart contracts.
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.
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.
This contract was created by a token generator and the liquidity will be added to an address of the providing service.
The owner can blacklist addresses.
The _setBalance will mint/burn functions
Every time someone is trying to transfer the following call will happen
1. _transfer function will be called
2. If "swapTokensAtAmount" is lower than contractTokenBalance the logic above will be executed
3. "swapAndSendToFee" function will be called where the issue is
4. Duality Token will be swapped to WBNB and after it, the swapped token (in this case WBNB) will be swapped to rewardToken (in your case also the WBNB address)
5. The function will be reverted and nobody is able to transfer any more.
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
Access control
These functions can be called by anyone and users can remove/set the MAP of other users.
Pending
#2 medium Issue
Incorrect Swap Mechanism
The contract swaps the same token twice which will result in a revert of the transaction everytime this function is called
low Issues | 6 findings
Pending
#1 low Issue
Local variables shadowing (shadowing-local)
Rename the local variables that shadow another component.
Pending
#2 low Issue
Missing Zero Address Validation (missing-zero-check)
Check that the address is not zero.
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 flags that they have been tested with 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
Pending
#5 low Issue
Missing Error Message
Always use an error message with the require statement so it doesn't create any confusion.
Pending
#6 low Issue
No limitations
The value of the 'minimumTokenBal' can be set without any limitations
informational Issues | 4 findings
Pending
#1 informational Issue
Functions that are not used (dead-code)
Remove unused functions.
Pending
#2 informational Issue
Unused state variables (unused-state)
Remove unused state variables.
Pending
#3 informational Issue
Unused return values (unused-return)
Ensure that all the return values of the function calls are used.
Pending
#4 informational Issue
Misspelling
Correct the spelling for proper readability