If you notice some outdated information please let us know!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? (%)
They are available at website https://github.com/ampleforth/uFragments, as indicated in the Appendix.
2. Is the code actively being used? (%)
Activity is over 10 transactions a day on contract AdminUpgradeabilityProxy.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 252 commits and 12 branches, this is a very 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)
Location: https://www.linkedin.com/company/ampleforth/.
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.
6. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
7. Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)
Ampleforth covers their basic software functions at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I-NmSnQ6E7wY1nyouuf-GuDdJWNCnJWl/view.
8. Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)
Ampleforth covers the most major of their software functions at https://drive.google.com/file/d/1I-NmSnQ6E7wY1nyouuf-GuDdJWNCnJWl/view. In addition, the code commenting connects the software with the white paper. However neither are actually software documentation. Therefore a 50% score is given.
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 a lack of traceability in the Ampleforth technical documentation as no functions are listed in the whitepaper. Commenting is quite good though so 40% and fills the need sfor docs a bit. Therefore 40%.
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) (%)
Ampleforth has a 96% codecov for their uFragments repository, 100% codecov for their oracle repository, and 100% codecov for their ampl-balancer repository. (96%+100%+100%)/3 = 99%
13. Scripts and instructions to run the tests? (Y/N)
14. Report of the results (%)
All codecov reports in the Ampleforth GitHub are private and have their access denied to users.
15. Formal Verification test done (%)
Ampleforth has had a Certik Formal Verification test done here.
16. Stress Testing environment (%)
Evidence of Ampleforth's test-net smart contract usage can be found here.
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
17. Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%)
Ampleforth has had multiple audits pre and post-deployment of their multiple smart contracts. The full list of audit reports can be found here, and include reports from QuantStamp, Certik, Slowmist and Trail of Bits.
18. Is the bug bounty acceptable high? (%)
Ampleforth has a Bug Bounty program with Immunefi that is live and rewards participating users with up to $100K in rewards.
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 (%)
Ampleforth's community governance section can easily be found in their documentation here.
20. Is the information clear and complete (%)
21. Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments (%)
All descriptions pertaining governance information in the Ampleforth documentation are all detailed in user-friendly language.
22. Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests (%)
According to the Ampleforth roadmap and GitHub commits, the pause function was removed in 2020.
1/**
2 * @title Orchestrator
3 * @notice The orchestrator is the main entry point for rebase operations. It coordinates the policy
4 * actions with external consumers.
5 */
6contract Orchestrator is Ownable {
7 struct Transaction {
8 bool enabled;
9 address destination;
10 bytes data;
11 }
12
13 // Stable ordering is not guaranteed.
14 Transaction[] public transactions;
15
16 UFragmentsPolicy public policy;
17
18 /**
19 * @param policy_ Address of the UFragments policy.
20 */
21 constructor(address policy_) public {
22 Ownable.initialize(msg.sender);
23 policy = UFragmentsPolicy(policy_);
24 }
25
26 /**
27 * @notice Main entry point to initiate a rebase operation.
28 * The Orchestrator calls rebase on the policy and notifies downstream applications.
29 * Contracts are guarded from calling, to avoid flash loan attacks on liquidity
30 * providers.
31 * If a transaction in the transaction list fails, Orchestrator will stop execution
32 * and revert to prevent a gas underprice attack.
33 */
34 function rebase() external {
35 require(msg.sender == tx.origin); // solhint-disable-line avoid-tx-origin
36
37 policy.rebase();
38
39 for (uint256 i = 0; i < transactions.length; i++) {
40 Transaction storage t = transactions[i];
41 if (t.enabled) {
42 (bool result, ) = t.destination.call(t.data);
43 if (!result) {
44 revert("Transaction Failed");
45 }
46 }
47 }
48 }
49
50 /**
51 * @notice Adds a transaction that gets called for a downstream receiver of rebases
52 * @param destination Address of contract destination
53 * @param data Transaction data payload
54 */
55 function addTransaction(address destination, bytes memory data) external onlyOwner {
56 transactions.push(Transaction({enabled: true, destination: destination, data: data}));
57 }
58
59 /**
60 * @param index Index of transaction to remove.
61 * Transaction ordering may have changed since adding.
62 */
63 function removeTransaction(uint256 index) external onlyOwner {
64 require(index < transactions.length, "index out of bounds");
65
66 if (index < transactions.length - 1) {
67 transactions[index] = transactions[transactions.length - 1];
68 }
69
70 transactions.pop();
71 }
72
73 /*
74 * @param index Index of transaction. Transaction ordering may have changed since adding.
75 * @param enabled True for enabled, false for disabled.
76 */
77 function setTransactionEnabled(uint256 index, bool enabled) external onlyOwner {
78 require(index < transactions.length, "index must be in range of stored tx list");
79 transactions[index].enabled = enabled;
80 }
81
82 /*
83 * @return Number of transactions, both enabled and disabled, in transactions list.
84 */
85 function transactionsSize() external view returns (uint256) {
86 return transactions.length;
87 }
88}
Comments to Code: 1078 / 1747 = 62 %
Tests to Code: 8252 / 1747 = 472 %