If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
Process Quality Review (0.9)
AAVE V3
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? (%)
AAVE V3 deployed contracts are available in the developer docs.
2. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
Yes, it is conveniently reached from the homepage of the website under "AAVE protocol"
3. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
Aave has many public and anonymous developers.
4. How responsive are the devs when we present our initial report?
Quick response from devs.
Code Documentation
87%
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
5. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
Yes, there is a white paper. It is clearly referenced in the developer docs.
6. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (%)
The pages "V3 Overview" and "Contracts Overview" provide the equivalent of a basic block diagram of software aspects. This gives a score of 75%.
7. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
The Core Contracts section includes full documentation for the code. Score 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? (%)
100% Information is well organized, compartmentalized and easy to navigate
Testing
100%
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? (%)
As per the script, there is 792% testing to code (TtC). Aave's high TtC is a sign of significant and efficacious testing practices.
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
Aave has full code coverage.
12. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
There are full build reports for each revision. This scores 100%.
13. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
Aave V3 has undergone formal verification.
Security
93%
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
14. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)
The audits are listed in the GitHub readme. There are multiple audits before deployment with corrections.
15. Is there a matrix of audit applicability on deployed code (%)? Please refer to the example doc for reference.
The list of audits indicates exactly which version the audit is applicable to and the necessary dates. While it does not mention applicability (or the lack thereof), it meets most of the requirements for an audit applicability document. Score of 80% is given.
16. Is the bug bounty value acceptably high (%)
AAVE has an active bug bounty program with Immunifi for $1 million. This corresponds to a score of 100%.
17. Is there documented protocol monitoring (%)?
While I'm sure that AAVE is doing protocol monitoring for security purposes, I could find no documentation referring to this. This drives a score of 0%.
18. Is there documented protocol front-end monitoring (%)?
The AAVE website has comprehensive front end monitoring that is described clearly in their security documentation.
Admin Controls
83%
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? (%)
AAVE is generally updateable via governance, with a timelock. As per revised guidance, this gives a 90% score.
20. Is the protocol's code upgradeability clearly explained in non technical terms? (%)
AAVE is almost fully upgradable via governance, with a time lock. This is not clearly described in the documentation. More clarity is required. Score 50%, as per guidance.
21. Are the admin addresses, roles and capabilities clearly explained? (%)
Almost all changes are done through Governance directly to the code. The exceptions are the AAVE guardians who have selected capabilities listed specifically.
22. Are the signers of the admin addresses clearly listed and provably distinct humans? (%)
The signers for the Guardian MultiSig are listed clearly using their full names and companies for almost all signers. This gives a score of 100%.
23. Is there a robust documented transaction signing policy? Please refer to the Example doc for reference.(%)
Since virtually all admin functions take place via governments, a transaction signing policy is not required. This defaults to 100%.
Oracles
100%
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.
24. Are Oracles relevant? (Y/N)
Oracles are relevant. There is a separate module and section in the documentation.
25. Is the protocol's Oracle sufficiently documented? (%)
The explanation and functions of the are well described. The source is identified. |
26. Can flashloan attacks be applied to the protocol, and if so, are those flashloan attack risks mitigated? (Y/N)
Siloed borrowing is a method to mitigate manipulatable oracles (for example illiquid Uni V3 pairs). This is effective flashloan protection.