QDVI Info
QDVI is an innovative project aimed at building a luxury hotel complex in Kudowa-Zdrój, with a long-term vision for global development and expansion. Our mission is to deliver unparalleled hospitality experiences for the most discerning clients, offering not only comfortable spaces but also exceptional benefits and exclusive experiences that meet the expectations of modern travelers.
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.
Contract is not upgradeable
The contract does not use proxy patterns or other mechanisms to allow future upgrades. Its behavior is locked in its current state.
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.
Ownership Privileges
- The owner can set ICO complete.
- The owner can set a round price of USD.
- The owner can set the listing price in USD.
- The owner can set the target amount in USD.
- The owner can withdraw funds and tokens.
Note - This Audit report consists of a security analysis of the QDVI 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 QDVI team. Other contracts associated with the project were not audited by our team. We recommend investors 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 | 3 findings
Pending
#1 medium Issue
The owner can change during Mid-Sale.
The owner can modify crucial sale parameters—Round price, Listing price, and Target Amount USD. Doing so can cause confusion among buyers expecting the original rate, potentially leading to mismatch in token allocations or severe disruptions in user trust. If the stage or price changes unexpectedly, purchasers might pay incorrect amounts for tokens. Similarly, adjusting the supply mid-sale could cause overselling or unexpected shortages. Transferring ownership unexpectedly can also expose the contract to malicious actions if the new owner changes parameters unfairly. These issues can undermine the sale’s overall transparency and fairness.
Pending
#2 medium Issue
Missing ‘NonReentrant’ check.
The contract imports the reentrancy guard in the contract but the staking or un-staking function does not have the reentrancy guard check. It is recommended to add the check-in function to avoid any reentrancy issues in the contract.
Pending
#3 medium Issue
Missing allowance check
This function calculates the token amount based on the provided USD value and then attempts to transfer the stablecoin from the caller’s address to the contract. However, it lacks a crucial allowance check. Without verifying that the contract has a sufficient allowance for the user to spend their tokens, the transaction may fail or revert due to insufficient approval. To address this, include an explicit check, such as require(usdcToken.allowance(msg.sender, address(this)) >= usdAmount, "Insufficient allowance"), before calling transferFrom. This ensures that the user has granted adequate permission to the contract, preventing unexpected failures and improving the function’s reliability. Always confirm token allowances.
low Issues | 3 findings
Pending
#1 low Issue
Missing events arithmetic.
It is recommended to emit all the critical parameter changes.
Pending
#2 low Issue
Floating pragma solidity version.
Adding the constant version of solidity is recommended, as this prevents the unintentional deployment of a contract with an outdated compiler that contains unresolved bugs.
Pending
#3 low Issue
Remove safemath library.
The compiler version above 0.8.0 has the ability to control arithmetic overflow/underflow. It is recommended to remove the unwanted code in order to avoid high gas fees.
informational Issues | 1 findings
Pending
#1 informational Issue
Remove unused functions.
Functions that are not used (dead code).