If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
Process Quality Review (0.9)
Ensuro
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 review looks for the following declarations from the developer's site. With these declarations, it is reasonable to trust the smart contracts.
- Here are my smart contract on the blockchain(s)
- Here is the documentation that explains what my smart contracts do
- Here are the tests I ran to verify my smart contracts
- Here are all the security steps I took to safeguard these contracts
- Here is an explanation of the control I have to change these smart contracts
- Here is how these smart contracts get information from outside the blockchain (if applicable)
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 relevant chains and team aspects. The document explaining these questions is here.
1. Are the smart contract addresses easy to find? (%)
Smart Contract addresses are in the GitBook.
2. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
Yes, but it is quite difficult to find. On the Architecture page of the documents you have to click on "open source". There is no link indicating the GitHub address clearly.
3. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
The team is public and listed on they about page of their website.
4. How responsive are the devs when we present our initial report?
Devs answered real quick.
Code Documentation
92%
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
5. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
White paper link can be found on the architecture page.
6. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (%)
There is comprehensive architecture description on the Architecture page and the subsequent pages on each smart contract aspects as found here.
7. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
There is strong software documentation starting from the Contracts page and moving down through each smart contract. This drives a score of 100%.
8. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)
60% Clear association between code and documents via non explicit traceability
9. Is the documentation organized to ensure information availability and clarity? (%)
The documentation is clearly organized and easy to navigate.
Testing
91%
This section covers the testing process of the protocol’s smart contract code previous to its deployment on the mainnet. The document explaining these questions is here.
10. Has the protocol tested their deployed code? (%)
Test to Code = 10601 / 5267 = 196% which gives a score of 100% as per guidance.
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
Code coverage is indicated as 97.7%. This is listed at the top of the readme.
12. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
All test data is available from the GitHub links. This gives a 100% score.
13. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
No formal verification tests are apparent.
Security
94%
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
14. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)
There are two audits from a very reputable auditors. The indicate problems found were resolved before deployment. This drives a score of 100%,
15. Is there a matrix of audit applicability on deployed code (%)? Please refer to the example doc for reference.
The list of audits very clearly indicates the applicability of the audits and what is not yet audited.
16. Is the bug bounty value acceptably high (%)
There is a bug bounty with Immunifi. The maximum bounty is only $30,000. This drives a score of 20%. Except the TVL of ensuro is 580k, making the 30k bounty equal to 5% of TVL (for now). As the amount is capped and not connected to the TVL, we will give a 60% score, rather than 80%.
17. Is there documented protocol monitoring (%)?
40% for documentation covering operational monitoring In the real-time monitoring section. On the Governance Page they mentioned using Forta bots and OpenZep Defencder to dynamically measures security risk. This is in the Restricted Executor section. This as another 40% for a total of 80%.
18. Is there documented protocol front-end monitoring (%)?
There is a full-page describing the security infrastructure for the webpage development. This drives a score of 100%.
Admin Controls
91%
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. Is the protocol code immutable or upgradeable? (%)
Contracts are upgradeable with roles and timelock. Score 80%.
20. Is the protocol's code upgradeability clearly explained in non technical terms? (%)
The upgradability is clearly explained in the Governance section
21. Are the admin addresses, roles and capabilities clearly explained? (%)
The roles and capability are clearly listed in the Governance page.
22. Are the signers of the admin addresses clearly listed and provably distinct humans? (%)
The signers and addresses of the MultiSync's are clearly listed on the Governance page. As their names and LinkedIn profiles are listed, they are counted as provably distinct humans. This gives a score of 100%.
23. Is there a robust documented transaction signing policy? Please refer to the Example doc for reference.(%)
There is a Transaction Signing policy section in the Governments page. It indicates a number of good transaction requirements (MultiSig, isolated environment, hardware wallet) and and auditing process through the Bermuda Monetary Authority. All of This Drives a Score of 90%.