If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
FAIL
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 2021. Permission is given to copy in whole, retaining this copyright label.
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? (%)
2. How active is the primary contract? (%)
3. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
3xcalibur is currently a closed-source protocol.
4. Is there a development history visible? (%)
Because the protocol is closed-source, it is impossible to evaluate the development history.
5. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
The 3xcalibur team is anonymous.
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
6. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
Location: https://3six9innovatio.gitbook.io/documentation/3six9-products/the-world-of-3xcalibur
7. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (Y/N)
3xcalibur provides a software architecture overview here.
8. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
There is no coverage of deployed contracts by software function documentation.
9. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)
There is no traceability between software documentation and implemented code, as there is no software documentation and the source code is closed-source.
10. Has the protocol tested their deployed code? (%)
Since 3xcalibur's code is closed-source, it is impossible to evaluate their testing suite.
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
There is no apparent code coverage of 3xcalibur's code.
12. Does the protocol provide scripts and instructions to run their tests? (Y/N)
Since 3xcalibur's code is closed-source, we cannot verify this.
13. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
There is no apparent detailed test report of 3xcalibur's code.
14. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
This protocol has not undergone formal verification.
15. Were the smart contracts deployed to a testnet? (Y/N)
3xcalibur's testnet is gated, and the deployments can therefore not be ascertained.
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
16. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)
3xcalibur has organized a Code4Arena auditing contest through which multiple fixes were subsequently introduced to the protocol's codebase. Additionally, 3xcalibur underwent a Omniscia audit. Most of the issues found were resolved, and both the audit contest and the Omniscia audit were performed before mainnet launch. However, because 3xcalibur's code is closed source, we cannot verify that the audited code is the source code being maintained & deployed today. As such, 25% will be deducted in accordance with our guidance.
17. Is the bounty value acceptably high (%)
3xcalibur currently does not offer a bug bounty program.
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?
There is no semblance of admin control information within 3xcalibur's documentation.
19. Are relevant contracts clearly labelled as upgradeable or immutable? (%)
Code is immutable. This is not documented, however.
20. Is the type of smart contract ownership clearly indicated? (%)
While there is a governance mechanism within the protocol, it is unclear how much control it has. In addition, no information regarding ownership at a smart contract level is detailed within the 3xcalibur docs.
21. Are the protocol's smart contract change capabilities described? (%)
No smart contract change capability is mentioned in 3xcalibur's documentation.
22. Is the protocol's admin control information easy to understand? (%)
No information regarding admin control exists.
23. Is there sufficient Pause Control documentation? (%)
No mention or proven existence of a pause control is evident.
24. Is there sufficient Timelock documentation? (%)
3xcalibur does not provide any details regarding a timelock.
25. Is the Timelock of an adequate length? (Y/N)
The existence of a timelock is unclear, and so is its duration.
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? (%)
Because 3xcalibur utilizes a stableswap architecture, there is no need for a traditional oracle. The pricing mechanisms regulate themselves via constant product formulas.
27. Is front running mitigated by this protocol? (Y/N)
3xcalibur does not document they ways in which they mitigate front running possibilities.
28. Can flashloan attacks be applied to the protocol, and if so, are those flashloan attack risks mitigated? (Y/N)
While 3xcalibur infers that the lack of an oracle solves oracle-attributed exploits such as liquidity manipulation, they do not explicitly detail the mechanisms in which the protocol mitigates the possibility of a liquidity or flash loan manipulation.
1From Etherscan:
2
3contract Router {
4
5 struct route {
6 address from;
7 address to;
8 bool stable;
9 }
10
11 address public immutable factory;
12 IWETH public immutable weth;
13 uint internal constant MINIMUM_LIQUIDITY = 10**3;
14 bytes32 immutable pairCodeHash;
15
16 modifier ensure(uint deadline) {
17 require(deadline >= block.timestamp, 'BaseV1Router: EXPIRED');
18 _;
19 }
20
21 constructor(address _factory, address _weth) {
22 require(
23 _factory != address(0) &&
24 _weth != address(0),
25 "Router: zero address provided in constructor"
26 );
27 factory = _factory;
28 pairCodeHash = ISwapFactory(_factory).pairCodeHash();
29 weth = IWETH(_weth);
30 }
31
32 receive() external payable {
33 assert(msg.sender == address(weth)); // only accept ETH via fallback from the WETH contract
34 }
35
36 function sortTokens(address tokenA, address tokenB) public pure returns (address token0, address token1) {
37 require(tokenA != tokenB, 'BaseV1Router: IDENTICAL_ADDRESSES');
38 (token0, token1) = tokenA < tokenB ? (tokenA, tokenB) : (tokenB, tokenA);
39 require(token0 != address(0), 'BaseV1Router: ZERO_ADDRESS');
40 }
41
42 // calculates the CREATE2 address for a pair without making any external calls
43 function pairFor(address tokenA, address tokenB, bool stable) public view returns (address pair) {
44 (address token0, address token1) = sortTokens(tokenA, tokenB);
45 pair = address(uint160(uint256(keccak256(abi.encodePacked(
46 hex'ff',
47 factory,
48 keccak256(abi.encodePacked(token0, token1, stable)),
49 pairCodeHash // init code hash
50 )))));
51 }
52
53 // given some amount of an asset and pair reserves, returns an equivalent amount of the other asset
54 function quoteLiquidity(uint amountA, uint reserveA, uint reserveB) internal pure returns (uint amountB) {
55 require(amountA > 0, 'BaseV1Router: INSUFFICIENT_AMOUNT');
56 require(reserveA > 0 && reserveB > 0, 'BaseV1Router: INSUFFICIENT_LIQUIDITY');
57 amountB = amountA * reserveB / reserveA;
58 }
59
60 // fetches and sorts the reserves for a pair
61 function getReserves(address tokenA, address tokenB, bool stable) public view returns (uint reserveA, uint reserveB) {
62 (address token0,) = sortTokens(tokenA, tokenB);
63 (uint reserve0, uint reserve1,) = ISwapPair(pairFor(tokenA, tokenB, stable)).getReserves();
64 (reserveA, reserveB) = tokenA == token0 ? (reserve0, reserve1) : (reserve1, reserve0);
65 }
66
67 // performs chained getAmountOut calculations on any number of pairs
68 function getAmountOut(uint amountIn, address tokenIn, address tokenOut) external view returns (uint amount, bool stable) {
69 address pair = pairFor(tokenIn, tokenOut, true);
70 uint amountStable;
71 uint amountVolatile;
72 if (ISwapFactory(factory).isPair(pair)) {
73 amountStable = ISwapPair(pair).getAmountOut(amountIn, tokenIn);
74 }
75 pair = pairFor(tokenIn, tokenOut, false);
76 if (ISwapFactory(factory).isPair(pair)) {
77 amountVolatile = ISwapPair(pair).getAmountOut(amountIn, tokenIn);
78 }
79 return amountStable > amountVolatile ? (amountStable, true) : (amountVolatile, false);
80 }
81
82 // performs chained getAmountOut calculations on any number of pairs
83 function getAmountsOut(uint amountIn, route[] memory routes) public view returns (uint[] memory amounts) {
84 require(routes.length >= 1, 'BaseV1Router: INVALID_PATH');
85 amounts = new uint[](routes.length+1);
86 amounts[0] = amountIn;
87 for (uint i = 0; i < routes.length; i++) {
88 address pair = pairFor(routes[i].from, routes[i].to, routes[i].stable);
89 if (ISwapFactory(factory).isPair(pair)) {
90 amounts[i+1] = ISwapPair(pair).getAmountOut(amounts[i], routes[i].from);
91 }
92 }
93 }
94
95 function isPair(address pair) external view returns (bool) {
96 return ISwapFactory(factory).isPair(pair);
97 }
98
99 function quoteAddLiquidity(
100 address tokenA,
101 address tokenB,
102 bool stable,
103 uint amountADesired,
104 uint amountBDesired
105 ) external view returns (uint amountA, uint amountB, uint liquidity) {
106 // create the pair if it doesn't exist yet
107 address _pair = ISwapFactory(factory).getPair(tokenA, tokenB, stable);
108 (uint reserveA, uint reserveB) = (0,0);
109 uint _totalSupply = 0;
110 if (_pair != address(0)) {
111 _totalSupply = IERC20(_pair).totalSupply();
112 (reserveA, reserveB) = getReserves(tokenA, tokenB, stable);
113 }
114 if (reserveA == 0 && reserveB == 0) {
115 (amountA, amountB) = (amountADesired, amountBDesired);
116 liquidity = Math.sqrt(amountA * amountB) - MINIMUM_LIQUIDITY;
117 } else {
118
119 uint amountBOptimal = quoteLiquidity(amountADesired, reserveA, reserveB);
120 if (amountBOptimal <= amountBDesired) {
121 (amountA, amountB) = (amountADesired, amountBOptimal);
122 liquidity = Math.min(amountA * _totalSupply / reserveA, amountB * _totalSupply / reserveB);
123 } else {
124 uint amountAOptimal = quoteLiquidity(amountBDesired, reserveB, reserveA);
125 (amountA, amountB) = (amountAOptimal, amountBDesired);
126 liquidity = Math.min(amountA * _totalSupply / reserveA, amountB * _totalSupply / reserveB);
127 }
128 }
129 }
130
131 function quoteRemoveLiquidity(
132 address tokenA,
133 address tokenB,
134 bool stable,
135 uint liquidity
136 ) external view returns (uint amountA, uint amountB) {
137 // create the pair if it doesn't exist yet
138 address _pair = ISwapFactory(factory).getPair(tokenA, tokenB, stable);
139
140 if (_pair == address(0)) {
141 return (0,0);
142 }
143
144 (uint reserveA, uint reserveB) = getReserves(tokenA, tokenB, stable);
145 uint _totalSupply = IERC20(_pair).totalSupply();
146
147 amountA = liquidity * reserveA / _totalSupply; // using balances ensures pro-rata distribution
148 amountB = liquidity * reserveB / _totalSupply; // using balances ensures pro-rata distribution
149
150 }
151