If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
PASS
The final review score is indicated as a percentage. The percentage is calculated as Achieved Points due to MAX Possible Points. For each element the answer can be either Yes/No or a percentage. For a detailed breakdown of the individual weights of each question, please consult this document.
Very simply, the audit looks for the following declarations from the developer's site. With these declarations, it is reasonable to trust the smart contracts.
This report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice of any kind, nor does it constitute an offer to provide investment advisory or other services. Nothing in this report shall be considered a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security, token, future, option or other financial instrument or to offer or provide any investment advice or service to any person in any jurisdiction. Nothing contained in this report constitutes investment advice or offers any opinion with respect to the suitability of any security, and the views expressed in this report should not be taken as advice to buy, sell or hold any security. The information in this report should not be relied upon for the purpose of investing. In preparing the information contained in this report, we have not taken into account the investment needs, objectives and financial circumstances of any particular investor. This information has no regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation and particular needs of any specific recipient of this information and investments discussed may not be suitable for all investors.
Any views expressed in this report by us were prepared based upon the information available to us at the time such views were written. The views expressed within this report are limited to DeFiSafety and the author and do not reflect those of any additional or third party and are strictly based upon DeFiSafety, its authors, interpretations and evaluation of relevant data. Changed or additional information could cause such views to change. All information is subject to possible correction. Information may quickly become unreliable for various reasons, including changes in market conditions or economic circumstances.
This completed report is copyright (c) DeFiSafety 2023. Permission is given to copy in whole, retaining this copyright label.
This section looks at the code deployed on the Mainnet that gets reviewed and its corresponding software repository. The document explaining these questions is here.
1. Are the executing code addresses readily available? (%)
Guidance: 100% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo, quick to find 70% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo but takes a bit of looking 40% Addresses in mainnet.json, in discord or sub graph, etc 20% Address found but labelling not clear or easy to find 0% Executing addresses could not be found
2. Is the code actively being used? (%)
Activity is 30 transactions a day on contract coin.sol, as indicated in the Appendix.
3. Is there a public software repository? (Y/N)
Is there a public software repository with the code at a minimum, but also normally test and scripts. Even if the repository was created just to hold the files and has just 1 transaction, it gets a "Yes". For teams with private repositories, this answer is "No"
4. Is there a development history visible? (%)
With 89 commits and 3 branches, this is a healthy software repository.
This metric checks if the software repository demonstrates a strong steady history. This is normally demonstrated by commits, branches and releases in a software repository. A healthy history demonstrates a history of more than a month (at a minimum).
5. Is the team public (not anonymous)? (Y/N)
The names of the team members can be found on their GitHub.
For a "Yes" in this question, the real names of some team members must be public on the website or other documentation (LinkedIn, etc). If the team is anonymous, then this question is a "No".
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
7. Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)
Software function documentation can be found in their Documentation.
8. Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)
All their software functions are clearly full documented in their Documentation.
9. Are there sufficiently detailed comments for all functions within the deployed contract code (%)
The Comments to Code (CtC) ratio is the primary metric for this score.
10. Is it possible to trace from software documentation to the implementation in code (%)
Documentation lists the functions and describes their functions.
11. Full test suite (Covers all the deployed code) (%)
With a TtC of 176%, this is a well-designed test suite.
This score is guided by the Test to Code ratio (TtC). Generally a good test to code ratio is over 100%. However the reviewers best judgement is the final deciding factor.
12. Code coverage (Covers all the deployed lines of code, or explains misses) (%)
There is no indication of code coverage.
13. Scripts and instructions to run the tests? (Y/N)
14. Report of the results (%)
There is no evident report of the test results.
15. Formal Verification test done (%)
There is no evident formal verification testing done.
16. Stress Testing environment (%)
There is clear stress-testing on Kovan testnet addresses.
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
17. Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%)
OpenZeppelin did an audit on November 24th, 2020. This was pre-release.
18. Is the bug bounty acceptable high? (%)
Reflexer's Bug bounty is 70,000$.
This section covers the documentation of special access controls for a DeFi protocol. The admin access controls are the contracts that allow updating contracts or coefficients in the protocol. Since these contracts can allow the protocol admins to "change the rules", complete disclosure of capabilities is vital for user's transparency. It is explained in this document.
19. Can a user clearly and quickly find the status of the access controls (%)
20. Is the information clear and complete (%)
The contracts are clearly labelled as upgradeable (or not) -- 30% The capabilities for change in the contracts are described -- 30% The type of ownership is clearly indicated (OnlyOwner / MultiSig / Defined Roles) -- 30%
21. Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments (%)
The information is in software friendly language.
22. Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests (%)
There is no evidence of pause-control documentation.
1pragma solidity 0.6.7;
2
3import "./GebUniswapV3ManagerBase.sol";
4
5/**
6 * @notice This contract is based on https://github.com/dmihal/uniswap-liquidity-dao/blob/master/contracts/MetaPool.sol
7 */
8contract GebUniswapV3LiquidityManager is GebUniswapV3ManagerBase {
9
10 / This contracts' position in the Uniswap V3 pool
11 Position public position;
12
13 /*
14 * @notice Constructor that sets initial parameters for this contract
15 * @param name_ The name of the ERC20 this contract will distribute
16 * @param symbol_ The symbol of the ERC20 this contract will distribute
17 * @param systemCoinAddress_ The address of the system coin
18 * @param threshold_ The liquidity threshold around the redemption price
19 * @param delay_ The minimum required time before rebalance() can be called
20 * @param pool_ Address of the already deployed Uniswap v3 pool that this contract will manage
21 * @param oracle_ Address of the already deployed oracle that provides both token prices
22 */
23 constructor(
24 string memory name_,
25 string memory symbol_,
26 address systemCoinAddress_,
27 uint256 threshold_,
28 uint256 delay_,
29 address pool_,
30 OracleForUniswapLike oracle_,
31 PoolViewer poolViewer_
32 ) public GebUniswapV3ManagerBase(name_, symbol_,systemCoinAddress_,delay_,pool_,oracle_,poolViewer_) {
33 require(threshold_ >= MIN_THRESHOLD && threshold_ <= MAX_THRESHOLD, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/invalid-threshold");
34 require(threshold_ % uint256(tickSpacing) == 0, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/threshold-incompatible-w/-tick-spacing");
35 require(delay_ >= MIN_DELAY && delay_ <= MAX_DELAY, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/invalid-delay");
36
37 int24 target = getTargetTick();
38 (int24 lower, int24 upper) = getTicksWithThreshold(target, threshold_);
39
40 position = Position({ id: keccak256(abi.encodePacked(address(this), lower, upper)), lowerTick: lower, upperTick: upper, uniLiquidity: 0, threshold: threshold_ });
41 }
42
43
44 // --- Getters ---
45
46 /**
47 * @notice Returns the current amount of token0 for a given liquidity amount
48 * @param _liquidity The amount of liquidity to withdraw
49 * @return amount0 The amount of token0 received for the liquidity amount
50 * @return amount1 The amount of token0 received for the liquidity amount
51 */
52 function getTokenAmountsFromLiquidity(uint128 _liquidity) public returns (uint256 amount0, uint256 amount1) {
53 (amount0, amount1) = _getTokenAmountsFromLiquidity(position, _liquidity);
54 }
55
56 /**
57 * @notice Returns the current amount of token0 for a given liquidity amount
58 * @param _liquidity The amount of liquidity to withdraw
59 * @return amount0 The amount of token0 received for the liquidity amount
60 */
61 function getToken0FromLiquidity(uint128 _liquidity) public returns (uint256 amount0) {
62 if (_liquidity == 0) return 0;
63 (amount0, ) = _getTokenAmountsFromLiquidity(position, _liquidity);
64 }
65
66 /**
67 * @notice Returns the current amount of token1 for a given liquidity amount
68 * @param _liquidity The amount of liquidity to withdraw
69 * @return amount1 The amount of token1 received for the liquidity amount
70 */
71 function getToken1FromLiquidity(uint128 _liquidity) public returns (uint256 amount1) {
72 if (_liquidity == 0) return 0;
73 (, amount1) = _getTokenAmountsFromLiquidity(position, _liquidity);
74 }
75
76 /**
77 * @notice Add liquidity to this pool manager
78 * @param newLiquidity The amount of liquidty that the user wishes to add
79 * @param recipient The address that will receive ERC20 wrapper tokens for the provided liquidity
80 * @dev In case of a multi-tranche scenario, rebalancing all tranches might be too expensive for the end user.
81 * A round robin could be done where, in each deposit, only one of the pool's positions is rebalanced
82 */
83 function deposit(uint256 newLiquidity, address recipient) external override returns (uint256 mintAmount) {
84 require(recipient != address(0), "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/invalid-recipient");
85 require(newLiquidity < MAX_UINT128, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/too-much-to-mint-at-once");
86
87
88 uint128 totalLiquidity = position.uniLiquidity;
89 int24 target= getTargetTick();
90
91 mintAmount = _deposit(position, uint128(newLiquidity), target);
92
93 // Calculate and mint a user's ERC20 liquidity tokens
94 uint256 __supply = _totalSupply;
95 if (__supply == 0) {
96 mintAmount = newLiquidity;
97 } else {
98 mintAmount = newLiquidity.mul(_totalSupply).div(totalLiquidity);
99 }
100
101 _mint(recipient, uint256(mintAmount));
102
103 emit Deposit(msg.sender, recipient, newLiquidity);
104 }
105
106 /**
107 * @notice Remove liquidity and withdraw the underlying assets
108 * @param liquidityAmount The amount of liquidity to withdraw
109 * @param recipient The address that will receive token0 and token1 tokens
110 * @return amount0 The amount of token0 requested from the pool
111 * @return amount1 The amount of token1 requested from the pool
112 */
113 function withdraw(uint256 liquidityAmount, address recipient) external override returns (uint256 amount0, uint256 amount1) {
114 require(recipient != address(0), "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/invalid-recipient");
115 require(liquidityAmount != 0, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/burning-zero-amount");
116
117 uint256 __supply = _totalSupply;
118 // Burn sender tokens
119 _burn(msg.sender, uint256(liquidityAmount));
120
121 uint256 _liquidityBurned = liquidityAmount.mul(position.uniLiquidity).div(__supply);
122 require(_liquidityBurned < MAX_UINT128, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/too-much-to-burn-at-once");
123
124 (amount0, amount1) = _withdraw(position, uint128(_liquidityBurned), recipient);
125 emit Withdraw(msg.sender, recipient, liquidityAmount);
126 }
127
128 /**
129 * @notice Public function to move liquidity to the correct threshold from the redemption price
130 */
131 function rebalance() external override {
132 require(block.timestamp.sub(lastRebalance) >= delay, "GebUniswapv3LiquidityManager/too-soon");
133
134 int24 target= getTargetTick();
135
136 _rebalance(position , target);
137 }
Comments to Code: 2116 / 4268 = 50 %
Tests to Code: 7368 / 4268 = 173 %