We express our gratitude to the EverValue Coin team for the collaborative engagement that enabled the execution of this Smart Contract Security Assessment.
EverValue Coin (EVA) is an ERC20 token designed to work on the Arbitrum network, offering a decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem centered around token burns and exchanges. EVA is burnable and interacts with various smart contracts, allowing holders to increase their value by burning tokens for a share of wBTC reserves, thus creating a dynamic share system.
Review Scope
10/10
8/10
100%
10/10
The system users should acknowledge all the risks summed up in the risks section of the report
This report may contain confidential information about IT systems and the intellectual property of the Customer, as well as information about potential vulnerabilities and methods of their exploitation.
The report can be disclosed publicly after prior consent by another Party. Any subsequent publication of this report shall be without mandatory consent.
Document
EverValue Coin is an ERC20 token with a burnable feature that interacts with other contracts like EVAMarket and EVABurnVault. These contracts allow users to buy, sell, or burn EVA tokens and receive market tokens or wBTC in return. The following contracts are involved:
EverValueCoin — A burnable ERC20 token with a limited supply, designed to work on the Arbitrum network. This contract manages the minting and burning of EVA tokens, with a capped total supply of 21,000,000 tokens. It has the following attributes:
Name: EverValueCoin
Symbol: EVA
Decimals: 18
Total supply: 21 m tokens.
EVABurnVault — A vault that allows users to burn EVA tokens in exchange for backing wBTC tokens. The contract facilitates the burning of EVA tokens and ensures fair distribution of wBTC tokens.
EVAMarket — A centralized market for buying and selling EVA tokens at administratively defined rates. The contract allows users to buy or sell EVA tokens using a defined market token, with adjustable rates and fees.
The owner of the EVAMarket contract can set the transaction fee for selling EVA tokens and withdraw all tokens from the contract.
The total Documentation quality score is 10 out of 10.
Functional requirements are provided
Technical description is provided.
The total Code quality score is 8 out of 10.
The development environment is configured.
Some best practices are missed.
Code coverage of the project is 100% (branch coverage).
Everything covered with tests.
Upon auditing, the code was found to contain 0 critical, 0 high, 1 medium, and 0 low severity issues. Out of these, 1 issues have been addressed and resolved, leading to a security score of 10 out of 10.
All identified issues are detailed in the “Findings” section of this report.
The comprehensive audit of the customer's smart contract yields an overall score of 9.6. This score reflects the combined evaluation of documentation, code quality, test coverage, and security aspects of the project.
Solidity Version Compatibility: The Solidity version 0.8.20
employs the recently introduced PUSH0
opcode in the Shanghai EVM. This opcode might not be universally supported across all blockchain networks and Layer 2 solutions. Thus, as a result, it might be not possible to deploy solution with version 0.8.20 >=
on some blockchains.
Centralized Minting to a Single Address: The project concentrates minting tokens in a single address, raising the risk of fund mismanagement or theft, especially if key storage security is compromised.
Absence of Pausable Feature for Unexpected Events: Without the pausable feature, the contract cannot be immediately paused in the event of unexpected occurrences.
Insufficient Multi-signature Controls for Critical Functions: The lack of multi-signature requirements for key operations centralizes decision-making power, increasing vulnerability to single points of failure or malicious insider actions, potentially leading to unauthorized transactions or configuration changes.
Code ― | Title | Status | Severity | |
---|---|---|---|---|
F-2024-4200 | Sales made with low amounts can be made for free due to lack of control | Fixed | Medium | |
F-2024-3282 | Inadequate Management of Transaction Fees in Token Sale Function | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3279 | Lack of Upper Bound on marketTokenPer100Eva Parameter | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3274 | Redundant _msgSender() , Meta-Transactions Not Implemented | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3273 | State Variables Only Set in The Constructor Should Be Declared immutable | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3272 | Redundant imports | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3271 | Functions that Can Be Declared External | Accepted | Observation | |
F-2024-3270 | Missing Events | Accepted | Observation |
When auditing smart contracts, Hacken is using a risk-based approach that considers Likelihood, Impact, Exploitability and Complexity metrics to evaluate findings and score severities.
Reference on how risk scoring is done is available through the repository in our Github organization:
Severity
Description
Severity
Description
Severity
Description
Severity
Description
The scope of the project includes the following smart contracts from the provided repository:
Scope Details
Deployed Contracts
Arbitrum
Deployed Contracts
Arbitrum
Deployed Contracts
Arbitrum
contracts/EverValueCoin.sol
contracts/EVABurnVault.sol
contracts/EVAMarket.sol