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If you notice some outdated information please let us know!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

ShapeShift

76%

Process Quality Review (0.8)

ShapeShift

Final score:76%
Date:04 Jan 2023
Audit Process:version 0.8
Author:Ryoma
PQR Score:76%

PASS

Protocol Website:shapeshift.com

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
BnB Smart Chain
Bitcoin
Ethereum
#QuestionAnswer
97%
1.100%
2.70%
3.Yes
4.100%
5.100
60%
6.Yes
7.Yes
8.40%
9.0%
77%
10.100%
11.99%
12.Yes
13.70%
14.No
15.No
87%
16.100%
17.0%
100%
18.100%
19.100%
20.100%
21.100%
22.100%
23.100%
24.100%
25.100%
0%
26.0%
27.No
28.No
Total:76%

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 2021. Permission is given to copy in whole, retaining this copyright label.

Smart Contracts & Team

97%

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%

Some of ShapeShift's smart contract addresses are clearly labeled in their docs.

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: 70%

The protocol's Staking smart contract recorded more than 10 transactions a week, but less than 10 transactions a day within the last month (sitting at around 2.5 transactions a day in the last month), earning them a 70% score. A screenshot of the transaction history is available in the appendix.

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

ShapeShift's public software repository can be found on their GitHub.

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%

ShapeShift maintains their repositories thoroughly, logging in a total of 2,678 commits and 3 branches, using their fox-staking-3 as an example.

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

The team operating the protocol can be found publicly on their LinkedIn page. Supporting documentation can be found in the appendix.

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

60%

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

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

Answer: Yes

ShapeShift outlines their documentation here.

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

Answer: Yes

ShapeShift clearly illustrates its software architecture through diagrams and written explanations.

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: 40%

While ShapeShift has some function documentation for their staking reward contracts in their contract code, the overall level is low.

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%

ShapeShift has only basic comments in its code, therefore no traceability

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

77%

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 464% 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.

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: 99%

ShapeShift's Zonkyo audit shows a total code coverage of 99%.

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

The protocol provides scripts to run their tests in their GitHub Testing page.

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: 70%

Test coverage results visible.

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

ShapeShift has not undergone formal verification and no report is available.

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: No

ShapeShift's testnet addresses could not be found.

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

87%

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

16. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)

Answer: 100%

ShapeShift has been sufficiently audited with at least 2 audits prior to deployment, for its token and for its staking, earning them a 100% score.      

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: 0%

No bounties are visible..

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%

ShapeShift's smart contracts are immutable and no special access privileges are permitted; this information can be found on the README.md repo in the protocol's GitHub.

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 clearly identified as immutable here.

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%

Because ShapeShift doesn't give special access privileges, there are no clear external entity that can be appointed as a contract owner based on the information found on their GitHub here.

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%

ShapeShift's smart contracts are immutable therefore the change capabilities are clearly outlined 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%

The protocol clearly states the immutability of its smart contracts in plain english here.

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%

While there are no pause control functions in ShapeShift's code, their smart contracts are immutable and the documentation explains why pause control functions are not a necessity here.

Percentage Score Guidance:
100%
Pause control(s) are clearly documented and there is records of at least one test within 3 months
80%
Pause control(s) explained clearly but no evidence of regular tests
40%
Pause controls mentioned with no detail on capability or tests
0%
Pause control not documented or explained

24. Is there sufficient Timelock documentation? (%)

Answer: 100%

Through the immutability of their contracts shown here, ShapeShift identifies why their protocol does not need a timelock, meaning that they earn a score of 100%.

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%

ShapeShift justifies why no Timelock is needed here.

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

0%

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: 0%

ShapeShift does not document any Oracle contract on their repositories.

Percentage 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

ShapeShift does not document mitigation techniques for front running in their protocol.

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: No

ShapeShift does not document mitigation techniques for flashloan attacks.

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

1pragma solidity ^0.7.6;
2
3import "../openzeppelin-solidity-3.4.0/contracts/math/Math.sol";
4import "../openzeppelin-solidity-3.4.0/contracts/math/SafeMath.sol";
5import "../openzeppelin-solidity-3.4.0/contracts/token/ERC20/SafeERC20.sol";
6import "../openzeppelin-solidity-3.4.0/contracts/utils/ReentrancyGuard.sol";
7
8// Inheritance
9import "./interfaces/IStakingRewards.sol";
10import "./RewardsDistributionRecipient.sol";
11
12contract StakingRewards is IStakingRewards, RewardsDistributionRecipient, ReentrancyGuard {
13    using SafeMath for uint256;
14    using SafeERC20 for IERC20;
15
16    /* ========== STATE VARIABLES ========== */
17
18    /// The token staking rewards will be paid in.
19    IERC20 public rewardsToken;
20    /// The token which must be staked to earn rewards.
21    IERC20 public stakingToken;
22    /// The time at which reward distribution will be complete.
23    uint256 public periodFinish = 0;
24    /// The rate at which rewards will be distributed.
25    uint256 public rewardRate = 0;
26    /// How long rewards will be distributed after the staking period begins.
27    uint256 public rewardsDuration = 135 days;
28    /// The last time rewardPerTokenStored was updated.
29    uint256 public lastUpdateTime;
30    /// The lastest snapshot of the amount of reward allocated to each staked token.
31    uint256 public rewardPerTokenStored;
32
33    /// How much reward-per-token has been paid out to each user who has withdrawn their stake.
34    mapping(address => uint256) public userRewardPerTokenPaid;
35    /// How much reward each user has earned.
36    mapping(address => uint256) public rewards;
37
38    uint256 private _totalSupply;
39    mapping(address => uint256) private _balances;
40
41    /* ========== CONSTRUCTOR ========== */
42
43    /// Deploy a new StakingRewards contract with the specified parameters. (This should only be done by the StakingRewardsFactory.)
44    constructor(
45        address _rewardsDistribution,
46        address _rewardsToken,
47        address _stakingToken
48    ) {
49        rewardsToken = IERC20(_rewardsToken);
50        stakingToken = IERC20(_stakingToken);
51        rewardsDistribution = _rewardsDistribution;
52    }
53
54    /* ========== VIEWS ========== */
55
56    /// Returns the total number of LP tokens staked.
57    function totalSupply() external view override returns (uint256) {
58        return _totalSupply;
59    }
60
61    /// Returns the total number of LP tokens staked by a given address.
62    function balanceOf(address account) external view override returns (uint256) {
63        return _balances[account];
64    }
65
66    /// Returns the last time for which a rewards have already been earned.
67    function lastTimeRewardApplicable() public view override returns (uint256) {
68        return Math.min(block.timestamp, periodFinish);
69    }
70
71    /// Returns the current amount of reward allocated per staked LP token.
72    function rewardPerToken() public view override returns (uint256) {
73        if (_totalSupply == 0) {
74            return rewardPerTokenStored;
75        }
76        return
77            rewardPerTokenStored.add(
78                lastTimeRewardApplicable().sub(lastUpdateTime).mul(rewardRate).mul(1e18).div(_totalSupply)
79            );
80    }
81
82    /// Returns the total reward earnings associated with a given address.
83    function earned(address account) public view override returns (uint256) {
84        return _balances[account].mul(rewardPerToken().sub(userRewardPerTokenPaid[account])).div(1e18).add(rewards[account]);
85    }
86
87    /// Returns the total reward amount.
88    function getRewardForDuration() external view override returns (uint256) {
89        return rewardRate.mul(rewardsDuration);
90    }
91
92    /* ========== MUTATIVE FUNCTIONS ========== */
93
94    /// Stake a number of LP tokens to earn rewards, using a signed permit instead of a balance approval.
95    function stakeWithPermit(uint256 amount, uint deadline, uint8 v, bytes32 r, bytes32 s) external nonReentrant updateReward(msg.sender) {
96        require(amount > 0, "Cannot stake 0");
97        _totalSupply = _totalSupply.add(amount);
98        _balances[msg.sender] = _balances[msg.sender].add(amount);
99
100        // permit
101        IUniswapV2ERC20(address(stakingToken)).permit(msg.sender, address(this), amount, deadline, v, r, s);
102
103        stakingToken.safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), amount);
104        emit Staked(msg.sender, amount);
105    }
106
107    /// Stake a number of LP tokens to earn rewards.
108    function stake(uint256 amount) external override nonReentrant updateReward(msg.sender) {
109        require(amount > 0, "Cannot stake 0");
110        _totalSupply = _totalSupply.add(amount);
111        _balances[msg.sender] = _balances[msg.sender].add(amount);
112        stakingToken.safeTransferFrom(msg.sender, address(this), amount);
113        emit Staked(msg.sender, amount);
114    }
115
116    /// Withdraw a number of LP tokens.
117    function withdraw(uint256 amount) public override nonReentrant updateReward(msg.sender) {
118        require(amount > 0, "Cannot withdraw 0");
119        _totalSupply = _totalSupply.sub(amount);
120        _balances[msg.sender] = _balances[msg.sender].sub(amount);
121        stakingToken.safeTransfer(msg.sender, amount);
122        emit Withdrawn(msg.sender, amount);
123    }
124
125    /// Transfer the caller's earned rewards.
126    function getReward() public override nonReentrant updateReward(msg.sender) {
127        uint256 reward = rewards[msg.sender];
128        if (reward > 0) {
129            rewards[msg.sender] = 0;
130            rewardsToken.safeTransfer(msg.sender, reward);
131            emit RewardPaid(msg.sender, reward);
132        }
133    }
134
135    /// Withdraw all staked LP tokens and any pending rewards.
136    function exit() external override {
137        withdraw(_balances[msg.sender]);
138        getReward();
139    }
140
141    /* ========== RESTRICTED FUNCTIONS ========== */
142
143    /// Called by the StakingRewardsFactory to begin reward distribution.
144    function notifyRewardAmount(uint256 reward) external override onlyRewardsDistribution updateReward(address(0)) {
145        if (block.timestamp >= periodFinish) {
146            rewardRate = reward.div(rewardsDuration);
147        } else {
148            uint256 remaining = periodFinish.sub(block.timestamp);
149            uint256 leftover = remaining.mul(rewardRate);
150            rewardRate = reward.add(leftover).div(rewardsDuration);
151        }
152
153        // Ensure the provided reward amount is not more than the balance in the contract.
154        // This keeps the reward rate in the right range, preventing overflows due to
155        // very high values of rewardRate in the earned and rewardsPerToken functions;
156        // Reward + leftover must be less than 2^256 / 10^18 to avoid overflow.
157        uint balance = rewardsToken.balanceOf(address(this));
158        require(rewardRate <= balance.div(rewardsDuration), "Provided reward too high");
159
160        lastUpdateTime = block.timestamp;
161        periodFinish = block.timestamp.add(rewardsDuration);
162        emit RewardAdded(reward);
163    }
164
165    /* ========== MODIFIERS ========== */
166
167    modifier updateReward(address account) {
168        rewardPerTokenStored = rewardPerToken();
169        lastUpdateTime = lastTimeRewardApplicable();
170        if (account != address(0)) {
171            rewards[account] = earned(account);
172            userRewardPerTokenPaid[account] = rewardPerTokenStored;
173        }
174        _;
175    }
176
177    /* ========== EVENTS ========== */
178
179    /// Emitted when the StakingRewardsFactory has allocated a reward balance to a StakingRewards contract, starting the staking period.
180    event RewardAdded(uint256 reward);
181    /// Emitted when a user stakes their LP tokens.
182    event Staked(address indexed user, uint256 amount);
183    /// Emitted when a user withdraws their LP tokens.
184    event Withdrawn(address indexed user, uint256 amount);
185    /// Emitted when a user has been paid a reward.
186    event RewardPaid(address indexed user, uint256 reward);
187}
188
189interface IUniswapV2ERC20 {
190    /// Allows a user to permit a contract to access their tokens by signing a permit.
191    function permit(address owner, address spender, uint value, uint deadline, uint8 v, bytes32 r, bytes32 s) external;
192}

JavaScript Tests

Language
Files
Lines
Blanks
Comments
Testing Code
Deployed Code
Complexity
TypeScript
7
5904
1109
365
4430
954
93

Tests to Code: 4430 / 954 = 464 %