POMBlend Info

The First Bridge with Completely Anonymous Cross-Chain Transactions in POM Chain (Proof of Memes Blockchain)

POMBlend Logo

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.

50.71
Poor Excellent

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.

Security Assessments

Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis Symbolic Execution SWC Check Manual Review
Contract address
0xa9c3...B859
Network
Ethereum - Mainnet
License N/A
Compiler N/A
Type N/A
Language Solidity
Onboard date 2023/01/02
Revision date In progress

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:

  1. Specification Review: Analyze the provided specifications, source code, and instructions to fully understand the smart contract's size, scope, and functionality.
  2. Manual Code Examination: Conduct a thorough line-by-line review of the source code to identify potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement.
  3. Specification Alignment: Ensure that the code accurately implements the provided specifications and intended functionalities.
  4. Test Coverage Assessment: Evaluate the extent and effectiveness of test cases in covering the codebase, identifying any gaps in testing.
  5. Symbolic Execution: Analyze the smart contract to determine how various inputs affect execution paths, identifying potential edge cases and vulnerabilities.
  6. Best Practices Evaluation: Assess the smart contracts against established industry and academic best practices to enhance efficiency, maintainability, and security.
  7. 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.


Ownership Privileges:
  • Set/Update fees, max transaction limit within a suitable range
  • Include/Exclude wallets from fees and max transaction limits
  • Set/update tax address
  • Manually swap tokens for native tokens
  • Manually send contract's balance to nativeTokenAddress, farmingAddress, and taxAddress
  • Withdraw any token from the contract, including the native ones

Files and details

Functions
public

/

State variables
public

/

Total lines
of code

/

Capabilities
Hover on items

/

Findings and Audit result

low Issues | 5 findings

Pending

#1 low Issue
Local variables shadowing (shadowing-local)
PBLToken.sol
L915
L923
L938
L983
L1003
L1134
L1154
Description

Rename the local variables that shadow another component.

Pending

#2 low Issue
Missing Zero Address Validation (missing-zero-check)
PBLToken.sol
L728
L728
L728
Description

Check that the address is not zero.

Pending

#3 low Issue
Uninitialized local variables (uninitialized-local)
PBLToken.sol
L1040
L1076
L1039
L1038
Description

Initialize all the variables. If a variable is meant to be initialized to zero, explicitly set it to zero to improve code readability.

Pending

#4 low Issue
Contract doesn’t import npm packages from source (like OpenZeppelin etc.)
PBLToken.sol
-
Description

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
Floating Pragma
PBLToken.sol
-
Description

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 thoroughly. Locking the pragma helps to ensure that contracts do not accidentally get deployed using other versions.

optimization Issues | 1 findings

Pending

#1 optimization Issue
Public function that could be declared external (external-function)
PBLToken.sol
L310-312
L318-321
L707-723
L774-776
L823-825
L875-877
L882-884
L890-892
L898-900
L902-904
L914-918
L959-968
L982-986
L1002-1011
L1197-1199
Description

Use the `external` attribute for functions never called from the contract.

informational Issues | 1 findings

Pending

#1 informational Issue
Functions that are not used (dead-code)
PBLToken.sol
L244-246
L192-197
L152-154
L214-219
L169-174
L23-29
L65-70
L77-82
L48-58
L36-41
Description

Remove unused functions.