Project overview - WAU - We All United

Type ERC20/BEP20
Language Solidity
Request date 2022/10/08
Latest Revision date 2022/10/08

Someone yesterday did not have money to celebrate his birthday, someone today cannot put food on the table for his kids, someone tonight will sleep rough and someone tomorrow will not be able to pay his bills. These are only a few of the millions of stories. Come to us, tell your story and we may be able to help. We are one… WE ALL UNITED. Looking for a good and trustworthy project? Scams, honeypots and rug pulls everywhere? Welcome to the most amazing, united, fun, friendly, engaging, respected and helping community ever... WE ALL UNITED!

Price Chart

Audit Summary

Static analysis Dynamic analysis Symbolic Execution SWC check
Network Binance Smart Chain
License & Compiler MIT / v0.8.4+commit.c7e474f2
Contract address 0xbE2e74309760B6B8e2D62bad4fC17B86ffb833a7
No critical 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's not possible to mint new tokens.
Contract owner cannot blacklist addresses. It's not possible to lock user funds by blacklisting addresses.
Contract owner cannot set fees above 25% The fees can be a maximum of 25%. The contract can therefore not be locked.
Contract cannot be locked Owner can't 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.
No Issues found.
No Issues found.
No Issues found.
4 Issues found. 0 resolved.
1 Issue found. 0 resolved.
No Issues found.

  • SafeMath library is unnecessary because safemath functionality is implemented above floating pragma version 0.8.4 by default. We recommend you to remove the "SafeMath" library and use raw mathematical operations instead
  • addresses that are excluded by the owner cannot call the deliver function
  • The liquidty will be added to the owner. Be aware of it because the owner can drain out the liquidity pool.

Audit Scope

This audit covered the following files listed below with a SHA-1 Hash. The above token Team provided us with the files that needs to be tested.

We will verify the following claims:
  • Correct implementation of Token standard
  • Deployer cannot mint any new tokens
  • Deployer cannot burn or lock user funds
  • Deployer cannot pause the contract
  • Overall checkup (Smart Contract Security)
The auditing process follows a routine series of steps:
  • Review of the specifications, sources, and instructions provided to SolidProof to make sure we understand the size, scope, and functionality of the smart contract.
  • Manual review of code, which is the process of reading source code line-by-line in an attempt to identify potential vulnerabilities.
  • Comparison to specification, which is the process of checking whether the code does what the specifications, sources, and instructions provided to SolidProof describe.
  • Test coverage analysis, which is the process of determining whether the test cases are actually covering the code and how much code is exercised when we run those test cases.
  • Symbolic execution, which is analysing a program to determine what inputs causes each part of a program to execute.
  • Best practices review, which is a review of the smart contracts to improve efficiency, effectiveness, clarify, maintainability, security, and control based on the established industry and academic practices, recommendations, and research.
  • Specific, itemized, actionable recommendations to help you take steps to secure your smart contracts.

A file with a different Hash has been modified, intentionally or otherwise, after the security review. A different Hash could be (but not necessarily) an indication of a changed condition or potential vulnerability that was not within the scope of this review.

Public functions Public state variables Total lines of code Capabilities
66 8 1638

Public functions Public state variables Total lines of code Capabilities
66 8 1638

Audit details

Throughout the review process, care was taken to evaluate the repository for security-related issues, code quality, and adherence to specification and best practices. To do so, reviewed line-by-line by our team of expert pentesters and smart contract developers, documenting any issues as there were discovered.

Risk represents the probability that a certain source-threat will exploit vulnerability, and the impact of that event on the organization or system. Risk Level is computed based on CVSS version 3.0.

#1 | Local variables shadowing (shadowing-local)
Severity Location Status
Low LiquidityGeneratorToken.sol : 1075, 1440 Pending

Rename the local variables that shadow another component.


Recommendation: Change to "owner_"

#2 | Missing Events Arithmetic (events-maths)
Severity Location Status
Low LiquidityGeneratorToken.sol : 1242-1248, 1250-1259 Pending

Emit an event for critical parameter changes.

#4 | Tautology or contradiction (tautology)
Severity Location Status
Low LiquidityGeneratorToken.sol : 972-1043, 972-1043, 972-1043 Pending

Fix the incorrect comparison by changing the value type or the comparison.


"taxFeeBps_", "liquidityFeeBps_" and "charityFeeBps_" cannot be lower than 0. The first three require statements are unnecessary because the range of uint16 is from 0 to 2^16 - 1

#5 | State variable visibility is missing
Severity Location Status
Low LiquidityGeneratorToken.sol : 953 Pending

The state variable visibility is missing: - "inSwapAndLiquify"

#2 | Functions that are not used (dead-code)
Severity Location Status
Informational LiquidityGeneratorToken.sol : 494-496, 504-510, 523-529, 537-548, 583-585, 593-602, 556-558, 566-575, 441-451, 469-474, 610-630, 106-108, 376-385, 336-338, 402-411, 207-213, 249-254, 261-266, 232-242, 220-225 Pending

Remove unused functions.


Disclaimer reports are not, nor should be considered, an “endorsement” or “disapproval” of any particular project or team. These reports are not, nor should be considered, an indication of the economics or value of any “product” or “asset” created by any team. do not cover testing or auditing the integration with external contract or services (such as Unicrypt, Uniswap, PancakeSwap etc’...) Audits do not provide any warranty or guarantee regarding the absolute bug- free nature of the technology analyzed, nor do they provide any indication of the technology proprietors. SolidProof Audits should not be used in any way to make decisions around investment or involvement with any particular project. These reports in no way provide investment advice, nor should be leveraged as investment advice of any sort. Reports represent an extensive auditing process intending to help our customers increase the quality of their code while reducing the high level of risk presented by cryptographic tokens and blockchain technology. Blockchain technology and cryptographic assets present a high level of ongoing risk. SolidProof’s position is that each company and individual are responsible for their own due diligence and continuous security. SolidProof in no way claims any guarantee of security or functionality of the technology we agree to analyze.