If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
Process Quality Review (0.7)
1inch.exchange
PASS
Scoring Appendix
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.
- Here is my smart contract on the blockchain
- You can see it matches a software repository used to develop the code
- Here is the documentation that explains what my smart contract does
- Here are the tests I ran to verify my smart contract
- Here are the audit(s) performed to review my code by third party experts
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.
Code And Team
100%
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? (%)
They are available at website https://github.com/1inch/liquidity-protocol/blob/master/README.md, as indicated in the Appendix.
2. Is the code actively being used? (%)
Activity is over 10 transactions a day on contract MooniswapFactory.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 578 commits and 7 branches, this is a very healthy 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)
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".
Documentation
82%
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
6. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
Location: https://docs.1inch.io/api/. Note: Previous whitepaper was deprecated, and a link to this API doc was provided instead.
7. Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)
There are basic software functions documented in the 1inch API documentation.
8. Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)
Most of the core software functions are documented in the API documentation, as well as in the READ.me of their liquidity-protocol repository.
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 (%)
There is clear and explicit traceability when it comes to the 1inch software documentation and its implementation within their source code, as seen in the "Quote/Swap" section, this READ.me and the swagger documentation.
Testing
82%
11. Full test suite (Covers all the deployed code) (%)
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 77% code coverage according to this codecov report.
13. Scripts and instructions to run the tests? (Y/N)
Scrips/Instructions location: The 1inch API docs serve as instructions to run whichever tests you want.
14. Report of the results (%)
The GitHub code coverage report is visible.
15. Formal Verification test done (%)
No evidence of a 1inch Formal Verification test was found in their documentation or in further web searches.
16. Stress Testing environment (%)
There is evidence of Kovan testnet smart contract usage in the "Deployment" repository of the 1inch GitHub.
Security
88%
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
17. Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%)
There have been multiple audits performed on the 1inch contracts before and after their various deployments (v1-v3). The full list of audits can be found here.
18. Is the bug bounty acceptable high? (%)
There is evidence of a 1inch bug bounty program, but no details regarding the potential rewards offered to participating users.
Access Controls
69%
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 (%)
1inch admin access control information can easily be found at the bottom of the governance section of their website at https://gov.1inch.io/.
20. Is the information clear and complete (%)
All of the relevant information is described here. The contracts are immutable.
21. Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments (%)
All descriptions of the 1inch governance model are user-friendly, complemented with graphs and imagery, as well as adequately detailing each aspect of the governance model at https://blog.1inch.io/1inch-token-is-released-e69ad69cf3ee. However they never actually say their contracts cannot be upgraded. The commenting in the executing governance contracts is also helpful.
22. Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests (%)
No Pause Guardian or similar function was found in the 1inch documentation. However the contracts have pause capability.
Appendices
1contract MooniswapFactory is IMooniswapFactory, MooniswapFactoryGovernance {
2 using UniERC20 for IERC20;
3
4 event Deployed(
5 Mooniswap indexed mooniswap,
6 IERC20 indexed token1,
7 IERC20 indexed token2
8 );
9
10 IMooniswapDeployer public immutable mooniswapDeployer;
11 address public immutable poolOwner;
12 Mooniswap[] public allPools;
13 mapping(Mooniswap => bool) public override isPool;
14 mapping(IERC20 => mapping(IERC20 => Mooniswap)) private _pools;
15
16 constructor (address _poolOwner, IMooniswapDeployer _mooniswapDeployer, address _governanceMothership) public MooniswapFactoryGovernance(_governanceMothership) {
17 poolOwner = _poolOwner;
18 mooniswapDeployer = _mooniswapDeployer;
19 }
20
21 function getAllPools() external view returns(Mooniswap[] memory) {
22 return allPools;
23 }
24
25 function pools(IERC20 tokenA, IERC20 tokenB) external view override returns (Mooniswap pool) {
26 (IERC20 token1, IERC20 token2) = sortTokens(tokenA, tokenB);
27 return _pools[token1][token2];
28 }
29
30 function deploy(IERC20 tokenA, IERC20 tokenB) public returns(Mooniswap pool) {
31 require(tokenA != tokenB, "Factory: not support same tokens");
32 (IERC20 token1, IERC20 token2) = sortTokens(tokenA, tokenB);
33 require(_pools[token1][token2] == Mooniswap(0), "Factory: pool already exists");
34
35 string memory symbol1 = token1.uniSymbol();
36 string memory symbol2 = token2.uniSymbol();
37
38 pool = mooniswapDeployer.deploy(
39 token1,
40 token2,
41 string(abi.encodePacked("1inch Liquidity Pool (", symbol1, "-", symbol2, ")")),
42 string(abi.encodePacked("1LP-", symbol1, "-", symbol2)),
43 poolOwner
44 );
45
46 _pools[token1][token2] = pool;
47 allPools.push(pool);
48 isPool[pool] = true;
49
50 emit Deployed(pool, token1, token2);
51 }
52
53 function sortTokens(IERC20 tokenA, IERC20 tokenB) public pure returns(IERC20, IERC20) {
54 if (tokenA < tokenB) {
55 return (tokenA, tokenB);
56 }
57 return (tokenB, tokenA);
58
59
Solidity Contracts
Comments to Code: 37 / 1049 = 4 %
JavaScript Tests
Tests to Code: 1796 / 1049 = 171 %