logo
bg_imgbg_imgbg_imgbg_img
exclamation mark iconReport an issue

If you notice some outdated information please let us know!

close icon
Name
Email
Your message
arrow-left

Beefy.finance

79%

Previous versions

Process Quality Review (0.8)

Beefy.finance

Final score:79%
Date:28 Apr 2022
Audit Process:version 0.8
Author:Nick
PQR Score:79%

PASS

Protocol Website:https://beefy.finance/

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.

The blockchain used by this protocol
Arbitrum
Avalanche
BnB Smart Chain
Celo
Cronos
HECO
Moonriver
Polygon
Aurora
Harmony
Moonbeam
Metis
Fuse
#QuestionAnswer
100%
1.100%
2.100%
3.Yes
4.100%
5.100
14%
6.Yes
7.No
8.0%
9.0%
70%
10.100%
11.50%
12.Yes
13.0%
14.No
15.Yes
76%
16.80%
17.50%
100%
18.100%
19.100%
20.100%
21.100%
22.100%
23.100%
24.100%
25.100%
88%
26.100
27.No
28.Yes
Total:79%

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.

Smart Contracts & Team

100%

This section looks at the code deployed on the relevant chain that gets reviewed and its corresponding software repository. The document explaining these questions is here.

1. Are the smart contract addresses easy to find? (%)

Answer: 100%

Contracts for specific vaults are listed on each strategy's webpage.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Clearly labelled and on website, documents or repository, 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 labeling not clear or easy to find
0%
Executing addresses could not be found

2. How active is the primary contract? (%)

Answer: 100%

Their most recent strategy has well over 10 interactions in the past day.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
More than 10 transactions a day
70%
More than 10 transactions a week
40%
More than 10 transactions a month
10%
Less than 10 transactions a month
0%
No activity

3. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

Location: https://github.com/beefyfinance

Score Guidance:
Yes
There is 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.
No
For teams with private repositories.

4. Is there a development history visible? (%)

Answer: 100%

At 810 commits at 74 branches, this development history has been around since before the cows came home.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Any one of 100+ commits, 10+branches
70%
Any one of 70+ commits, 7+branches
50%
Any one of 50+ commits, 5+branches
30%
Any one of 30+ commits, 3+branches
0%
Less than 2 branches or less than 30 commits

5. Is the team public (not anonymous)?

Answer: 100

Beefy has both public and anonymous team members. Given that two are public and confirm their contributions, we will award 100%.

Score Guidance:
100%
At least two names can be easily found in the protocol's website, documentation or medium. These are then confirmed by the personal websites of the individuals / their linkedin / twitter.
50%
At least one public name can be found to be working on the protocol.
0%
No public team members could be found.

Documentation

14%

This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.

6. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

Location: https://docs.beefy.finance/

7. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (Y/N)

Answer: No

Beefy documents no software architecture. While some yield farming diagrams are documented, they relate to fee programs and not specific contracts and how they interact with each other. On a strategy level, there is no clear documentation relating to how they operate.

Score Guidance:
Yes
The documents identify software architecture and contract interaction through any of the following: diagrams, arrows, specific reference to software functions or a written explanation on how smart contracts interact.
No
Protocols receive a "no" if none of these are included.

8. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)

Answer: 0%

There is no coverage of deployed contracts by software function documentation.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
All contracts and functions documented
80%
Only the major functions documented
79 - 1%
Estimate of the level of software documentation
0%
No software documentation

9. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)

Answer: 0%

There is no traceability between software documentation and implemented code. While there is good traceability on many different aspects of this protocol, there is nothing relating to software function documentation on contracts.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Clear explicit traceability between code and documentation at a requirement level for all code
60%
Clear association between code and documents via non explicit traceability
40%
Documentation lists all the functions and describes their functions
0%
No connection between documentation and code

Testing

70%

10. Has the protocol tested their deployed code? (%)

Answer: 100%

Code examples are in the Appendix at the end of this report.. As per the SLOC, there is 4% testing to code (TtC).    This score is guided by the Test to Code ratio (TtC). Generally a good test to code ratio is over 100%. However, the reviewer's best judgement is the final deciding factor.    This TtC is incredibly low given the stated vault testing procedure in their documentation. In addition, given each vault is the exact same, there is questionable value in documenting each vault's testing with the same test scripts.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
TtC > 120% Both unit and system test visible
80%
TtC > 80% Both unit and system test visible
40%
TtC < 80% Some tests visible
0%
No tests obvious

11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)

Answer: 50%

Beefy has a high relative TtC, meaning we will award 50% here.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Documented full coverage
99 - 51%
Value of test coverage from documented results
50%
No indication of code coverage but clearly there is a complete set of tests
30%
Some tests evident but not complete
0%
No test for coverage seen

12. Does the protocol provide scripts and instructions to run their tests? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

Scripts/Instructions location: https://github.com/beefyfinance/beefy-contracts#3-test-the-contracts

Score Guidance:
Yes
Scripts and/or instructions to run tests are available in the testing suite
No
Scripts and/or instructions to run tests are not available in the testing suite

13. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)

Answer: 0%

No test report is documented in their GitHub repository.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Detailed test report as described below
70%
GitHub code coverage report visible
0%
No test report evident

14. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)

Answer: No

Beefy has not undergone formal verification.

Score Guidance:
Yes
Formal Verification was performed and the report is readily available
No
Formal Verification was not performed and/or the report is not readily available.

15. Were the smart contracts deployed to a testnet? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

Beefy has been deployed to a testnet. Here is a vault.

Score Guidance:
Yes
Protocol has proved their tesnet usage by providing the addresses
No
Protocol has not proved their testnet usage by providing the addresses

Security

76%

This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.

16. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)

Answer: 80%

Beefy has undergone multiple audits. These were post deployment. Their first "audit" was not an audit - it is a smart contract analysis. Their second and third audit was conducted by CertiK. Beefy uses V6 vaults - the most recent audit had V4 vaults in scope. Nevertheless, given the highly fluid nature of yield aggregator contract deployment, we will award points for this. Still, it is time to update these audits or even enter into a continual audit agreement with a firm.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Multiple Audits performed before deployment and the audit findings are public and implemented or not required
90%
Single audit performed before deployment and audit findings are public and implemented or not required
70%
Audit(s) performed after deployment and no changes required. The Audit report is public.
65%
Code is forked from an already audited protocol and a changelog is provided explaining why forked code was used and what changes were made. This changelog must justify why the changes made do not affect the audit.
50%
Audit(s) performed after deployment and changes are needed but not implemented.
30%
Audit(s) performed are low-quality and do not indicate proper due diligence.
20%
No audit performed
0%
Audit Performed after deployment, existence is public, report is not public OR smart contract address' not found.
Deduct 25% if the audited code is not available for comparison.

17. Is the bounty value acceptably high (%)

Answer: 50%

This protocol offers an active bug bounty of $75K

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Bounty is 10% TVL or at least $1M AND active program (see below)
90%
Bounty is 5% TVL or at least 500k AND active program
80%
Bounty is 5% TVL or at least 500k
70%
Bounty is 100k or over AND active program
60%
Bounty is 100k or over
50%
Bounty is 50k or over AND active program
40%
Bounty is 50k or over
20%
Bug bounty program bounty is less than 50k
0%
No bug bounty program offered / the bug bounty program is dead
An active program means that a third party (such as Immunefi) is actively driving hackers to the site. An inactive program would be static mentions on the docs.

Admin Controls

100%

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.

18. Is the protocol's admin control information easy to find?

Answer: 100%

Admin control information is detailed in Beefy's documentation.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Admin Controls are clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo, quick to find
70%
Admin Controls are clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo but takes a bit of looking
40%
Admin Control docs are in multiple places and not well labelled
20%
Admin Control docs are in multiple places and not labelled
0%
Admin Control information could not be found

19. Are relevant contracts clearly labelled as upgradeable or immutable? (%)

Answer: 100%

The relevant contracts are identified as immutable. All vaults / strategies are immutable.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Both the contract documentation and the smart contract code state that the code is not upgradeable or immutable.
80%
All Contracts are clearly labelled as upgradeable (or not)
50%
Code is immutable but not mentioned anywhere in the documentation
0%
Admin control information could not be found

20. Is the type of smart contract ownership clearly indicated? (%)

Answer: 100%

The contracts are not owned by anyone.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
The type of ownership is clearly indicated in their documentation. (OnlyOwner / MultiSig / etc)
50%
The type of ownership is indicated, but only in the code. (OnlyOwner / MultiSig / etc)
0%
Admin Control information could not be found

21. Are the protocol's smart contract change capabilities described? (%)

Answer: 100%

Smart contracts cannot change, as identified here.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
The documentation covers the capabilities for change for all smart contracts
50%
The documentation covers the capabilities for change in some, but not all contracts
0%
The documentation does not cover the capabilities for change in any contract

22. Is the protocol's admin control information easy to understand? (%)

Answer: 100%

This information is in simple language.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
All the contracts are immutable
90%
Description relates to investments safety in clear non-software language
30%
Description all in software-specific language
0%
No admin control information could be found

23. Is there sufficient Pause Control documentation? (%)

Answer: 100%

Beefy does not use a pause control because it is immutable.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
If immutable and no changes possible
100%
If admin control is fully via governance
80%
Robust transaction signing process (7 or more elements)
70%
Adequate transaction signing process (5 or more elements)
60%
Weak transaction signing process (3 or more elements)
0%
No transaction signing process evident
Evidence of audits of signers following the process add 20%

24. Is there sufficient Timelock documentation? (%)

Answer: 100%

This protocol has some timelock documentation which can be found at this location. Each relevant contract is identified. There is a justification as to why 6 hours was chosen.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Documentation identifies and explains why the protocol does not need a Timelock OR Timelock documentation identifies its duration, which contracts it applies to and justifies this time period.
60%
A Timelock is identified and its duration is specified
30%
A Timelock is identified
0%
No Timelock information was documented

25. Is the Timelock of an adequate length? (Y/N)

Answer: 100%

The timelock is justified at 6 hours for reasons of agility.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Timelock is between 48 hours to 1 week OR justification as to why no Timelock is needed / is outside this length.
50%
Timelock is less than 48 hours or greater than 1 week.
0%
No Timelock information was documented OR no timelock length was identified.

Oracles

88%

This section goes over the documentation that a protocol may or may not supply about their Oracle usage. Oracles are a fundamental part of DeFi as they are responsible for relaying tons of price data information to thousands of protocols using blockchain technology. Not only are they important for price feeds, but they are also an essential component of transaction verification and security. These questions are explained in this document.

26. Is the protocol's Oracle sufficiently documented? (%)

Answer: 100

Beefy does not use an oracle, and this is stated and explained in this location.

Score Guidance:
100%
If it uses one, the Oracle is specified. The contracts dependent on the oracle are identified. Basic software functions are identified (if the protocol provides its own price feed data). Timeframe of price feeds are identified. OR The reason as to why the protocol does not use an Oracle is identified and explained.
75%
The Oracle documentation identifies both source and timeframe, but does not provide additional context regarding smart contracts.
50%
Only the Oracle source is identified.
0%
No oracle is named / no oracle information is documented.

27. Is front running mitigated by this protocol? (Y/N)

Answer: No

This protocol documents no front running mitigation techniques in their strategies.

Score Guidance:
Yes
The protocol cannot be front run and there is an explanation as to why OR documented front running countermeasures are implemented.
No
The Oracle documentation identifies both source and timeframe, but does not provide additional context regarding smart contracts.

28. Can flashloan attacks be applied to the protocol, and if so, are those flashloan attack risks mitigated? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

Beefy is not susceptible to flashloan attack, and this is explained in their documentation.

Score Guidance:
Yes
The protocol's documentation includes information on how they mitigate the possibilities and extents of flash loan attacks.
No
The protocol's documentation does not include any information regarding the mitigation of flash loan attacks.

Appendices

1// SPDX-License-Identifier: MIT
2
3pragma solidity ^0.6.0;
4
5import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/ERC20.sol";
6import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/SafeERC20.sol";
7import "@openzeppelin/contracts/math/SafeMath.sol";
8import "@openzeppelin/contracts/access/Ownable.sol";
9import "@openzeppelin/contracts/utils/ReentrancyGuard.sol";
10
11import "../interfaces/beefy/IStrategy.sol";
12
13/**
14 * @dev Implementation of a vault to deposit funds for yield optimizing.
15 * This is the contract that receives funds and that users interface with.
16 * The yield optimizing strategy itself is implemented in a separate 'Strategy.sol' contract.
17 */
18contract BeefyVaultV6 is ERC20, Ownable, ReentrancyGuard {
19    using SafeERC20 for IERC20;
20    using SafeMath for uint256;
21
22    struct StratCandidate {
23        address implementation;
24        uint proposedTime;
25    }
26
27    // The last proposed strategy to switch to.
28    StratCandidate public stratCandidate;
29    // The strategy currently in use by the vault.
30    IStrategy public strategy;
31    // The minimum time it has to pass before a strat candidate can be approved.
32    uint256 public immutable approvalDelay;
33
34    event NewStratCandidate(address implementation);
35    event UpgradeStrat(address implementation);
36
37    /**
38     * @dev Sets the value of {token} to the token that the vault will
39     * hold as underlying value. It initializes the vault's own 'moo' token.
40     * This token is minted when someone does a deposit. It is burned in order
41     * to withdraw the corresponding portion of the underlying assets.
42     * @param _strategy the address of the strategy.
43     * @param _name the name of the vault token.
44     * @param _symbol the symbol of the vault token.
45     * @param _approvalDelay the delay before a new strat can be approved.
46     */
47    constructor (
48        IStrategy _strategy,
49        string memory _name,
50        string memory _symbol,
51        uint256 _approvalDelay
52    ) public ERC20(
53        _name,
54        _symbol
55    ) {
56        strategy = _strategy;
57        approvalDelay = _approvalDelay;
58    }
59
60    function want() public view returns (IERC20) {
61        return IERC20(strategy.want());
62    }
63
64    /**
65     * @dev It calculates the total underlying value of {token} held by the system.
66     * It takes into account the vault contract balance, the strategy contract balance
67     *  and the balance deployed in other contracts as part of the strategy.
68     */
69    function balance() public view returns (uint) {
70        return want().balanceOf(address(this)).add(IStrategy(strategy).balanceOf());
71    }
72
73    /**
74     * @dev Custom logic in here for how much the vault allows to be borrowed.
75     * We return 100% of tokens for now. Under certain conditions we might
76     * want to keep some of the system funds at hand in the vault, instead
77     * of putting them to work.
78     */
79    function available() public view returns (uint256) {
80        return want().balanceOf(address(this));
81    }
82
83    /**
84     * @dev Function for various UIs to display the current value of one of our yield tokens.
85     * Returns an uint256 with 18 decimals of how much underlying asset one vault share represents.
86     */
87    function getPricePerFullShare() public view returns (uint256) {
88        return totalSupply() == 0 ? 1e18 : balance().mul(1e18).div(totalSupply());
89    }
90
91    /**
92     * @dev A helper function to call deposit() with all the sender's funds.
93     */
94    function depositAll() external {
95        deposit(want().balanceOf(msg.sender));
96    }
97
98    /**
99     * @dev The entrypoint of funds into the system. People deposit with this function
100     * into the vault. The vault is then in charge of sending funds into the strategy.
101     */
102    function deposit(uint _amount) public nonReentrant {
103        strategy.beforeDeposit();
104
105        uint256 _pool = balance();
106        want().safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), _amount);
107        earn();
108        uint256 _after = balance();
109        _amount = _after.sub(_pool); // Additional check for deflationary tokens
110        uint256 shares = 0;
111        if (totalSupply() == 0) {
112            shares = _amount;
113        } else {
114            shares = (_amount.mul(totalSupply())).div(_pool);
115        }
116        _mint(msg.sender, shares);
117    }
118
119    /**
120     * @dev Function to send funds into the strategy and put them to work. It's primarily called
121     * by the vault's deposit() function.
122     */
123    function earn() public {
124        uint _bal = available();
125        want().safeTransfer(address(strategy), _bal);
126        strategy.deposit();
127    }
128
129    /**
130     * @dev A helper function to call withdraw() with all the sender's funds.
131     */
132    function withdrawAll() external {
133        withdraw(balanceOf(msg.sender));
134    }
135
136    /**
137     * @dev Function to exit the system. The vault will withdraw the required tokens
138     * from the strategy and pay up the token holder. A proportional number of IOU
139     * tokens are burned in the process.
140     */
141    function withdraw(uint256 _shares) public {
142        uint256 r = (balance().mul(_shares)).div(totalSupply());
143        _burn(msg.sender, _shares);
144
145        uint b = want().balanceOf(address(this));
146        if (b < r) {
147            uint _withdraw = r.sub(b);
148            strategy.withdraw(_withdraw);
149            uint _after = want().balanceOf(address(this));
150            uint _diff = _after.sub(b);
151            if (_diff < _withdraw) {
152                r = b.add(_diff);
153            }
154        }
155
156        want().safeTransfer(msg.sender, r);
157    }
158
159    /** 
160     * @dev Sets the candidate for the new strat to use with this vault.
161     * @param _implementation The address of the candidate strategy.  
162     */
163    function proposeStrat(address _implementation) public onlyOwner {
164        require(address(this) == IStrategy(_implementation).vault(), "Proposal not valid for this Vault");
165        stratCandidate = StratCandidate({
166            implementation: _implementation,
167            proposedTime: block.timestamp
168         });
169
170        emit NewStratCandidate(_implementation);
171    }
172
173    /** 
174     * @dev It switches the active strat for the strat candidate. After upgrading, the 
175     * candidate implementation is set to the 0x00 address, and proposedTime to a time 
176     * happening in +100 years for safety. 
177     */
178
179    function upgradeStrat() public onlyOwner {
180        require(stratCandidate.implementation != address(0), "There is no candidate");
181        require(stratCandidate.proposedTime.add(approvalDelay) < block.timestamp, "Delay has not passed");
182
183        emit UpgradeStrat(stratCandidate.implementation);
184
185        strategy.retireStrat();
186        strategy = IStrategy(stratCandidate.implementation);
187        stratCandidate.implementation = address(0);
188        stratCandidate.proposedTime = 5000000000;
189
190        earn();
191    }
192
193    /**
194     * @dev Rescues random funds stuck that the strat can't handle.
195     * @param _token address of the token to rescue.
196     */
197    function inCaseTokensGetStuck(address _token) external onlyOwner {
198        require(_token != address(want()), "!token");
199
200        uint256 amount = IERC20(_token).balanceOf(address(this));
201        IERC20(_token).safeTransfer(msg.sender, amount);
202    }
203}

JavaScript Tests

Language
Files
Lines
Blanks
Comments
Testing Code
Deployed Code
Complexity
Enter language here
185
44162
8782
4897
1366
30483
3681

Tests to Code: 1366 / 30483 = 4 %