Raflex Info

WELCOME TO THE FIRST BLOCKCHAIN-INSPIRED MARKETPLACE, FREELANCING, E-LEARNING PLATFORM AND MORE! Your one-stop-shop platform for todays and future innovations! Bringing traditional businesses to the digital and decentralized world for individuals and corporate organizations from diverse backgrounds, languages, races, ages, professions, and interests.

Raflex Logo

Team and KYC Verification

The KYC verification for this project is currently in progress.

The team has submitted their information and verification is pending.

KYC Badge

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.

23.90
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

Select the audit
Static Analysis Dynamic Analysis Symbolic Execution SWC Check Manual Review
Contract address
0x487d...1c52
Network
BNB Smart Chain - Mainnet
License N/A
Compiler N/A
Type N/A
Language Solidity
Onboard date 2023/01/31
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 can set high fees

Contract owner is able to set fees above 25%. Very high fees can also prevent token transfer.

Token transfer can be locked

Owner can lock user funds with owner functions.

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:
  • Included/Exclude wallets from reward and fees
  • Set fees and liquidity percentages to any arbitrary value including 100% or more which is not recommended because it may lead to loss of user funds.
  • Set max transaction percentage to zero and lock user funds
  • Enable/Disable swap and liquify

 

We recommend investors/users 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 | 1 findings

Pending

#1 medium Issue
Fees can be 100% or more
Raflex.sol
L897
Description

The owner is able to set the fees up to 100% or even more which will lead in loss of user funds and may cause some functions to revert, It is recommended to limit the maximum fees under 25% which is to be set by the owner.

low Issues | 5 findings

Pending

#1 low Issue
Local variables shadowing (shadowing-local)
Raflex.sol
L797
L1001
Description

Rename the local variables that shadow another component.

Pending

#2 low Issue
Missing Events Arithmetic (events-maths)
Raflex.sol
L897-899
L901-903
L905-909
Description

Emit an event for critical parameter changes.

Pending

#3 low Issue
Old Compiler version
Raflex.sol
-
Description

The contract uses an old compiler version (^0.6.12) and we don't recommend using it because old versions tend to have known vulnerabilities that may get exploited in the future.

Pending

#4 low Issue
Floating Pragma
Raflex.sol
-
Description

The current pragma Solidity directive is “^0.6.12". 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

Pending

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

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)
Raflex.sol
L722
L720
L721
L716
L737
Description

Add the `constant` attributes to state variables that never change.

Pending

#2 optimization Issue
Public function that could be declared external (external-function)
Raflex.sol
L452-455
L461-465
L467-469
L472-477
L480-485
L771-773
L775-777
L779-781
L783-785
L792-795
L797-799
L801-804
L806-810
L812-815
L817-820
L822-824
L826-828
L830-837
L839-848
L856-864
L889-891
L893-895
L911-914
L997-999
Description

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)
Raflex.sol
L378-399
L338-340
L348-350
L363-365
L373-376
L285-294
L312-318
L257-260
L230-232
L246-249
Description

Remove unused functions.

Pending

#2 informational Issue
Function initializing state variables (function-init-state)
Raflex.sol
L717
L725
L728
Description

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 return values (unused-return)
Raflex.sol
L1096-1109
Description

Ensure that all the return values of the function calls are used.