Project overview - WeEco Token

Type ERC20/BEP20
Language Solidity
Request date 2022/08/02
Latest Revision date 2022/08/02

ECO Token is Cryptocurrency for supporting forest environmental management activities To prevent forest fires and smog problems that cause PM2.5 pollution and global warming (greenhouse effect) by innovations from Japan applied in the production process and promoting NFT art to support groups that do activities for the environment and nature Sustainable goals in solving such problems using main raw materials are 1. leaves, cleaning products 2. konjac/coffee, dietary supplements 3. cannabis, food production, beauty cosmetics. so that everyone can participate through the use of the product.

Price Chart

Audit Summary

Static analysis Dynamic analysis Symbolic Execution SWC check
Network Binance Smart Chain
License & Compiler MIT / v0.8.15+commit.e14f2714
Contract address 0x6E2224AEE2b81CC945c16fA831A46a6276B14fFb
No critical issues found The contract does not contain issues of high or medium criticality.
Contract owner can mint It's possible to mint new tokens.
Contract cannot be locked Owner can't lock any user funds.
Token can be burned There is a function to burn tokens in the contract.
Ownership is not renounced Contract can be manipulated by owner functions.
No Issues found.
No Issues found.
No Issues found.
2 Issues found. 0 resolved.
1 Issue found. 0 resolved.
No Issues found.

The owner can burn tokens from any account they want.

The owner can mint more tokens anytime they want which will also increase the total supply of the tokens and could lead to price manipulation done by the owner.

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
25 0 457

Public functions Public state variables Total lines of code Capabilities
25 0 457

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 ECO.sol: 259, 432 Pending

Rename the local variables that shadow another component.

#2 | Floating Pragma
Severity Location Status
Low ECO.sol: 3 Pending

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.

#1 | Functions that are not used (dead-code)
Severity Location Status
Informational ECO.sol: 101-104 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.