If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
Process Quality Review (0.9)
Jito
FAIL
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
83%
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? (%)
The state pool addresses are listed here.
2. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
Location: https://github.com/jito-foundation/stakenet
3. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
There are a number of public members listed as contributors on the GitHub.
4. How responsive are the devs when we present our initial report?
Devs did not respond.
Code Documentation
0%
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
5. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
No white paper could be found.
6. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (%)
No documentation of the software architecture could be found. Score 0%.
7. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
There is functionally no software documentation that we could find. We could not find separate software documentation. In the actual rust code, there are the occasional one-liner comments but nothing else. Overall score 0%.
8. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)
With no software documentation traceability is impossible. Score 0%.
9. Is the documentation organized to ensure information availability and clarity? (%)
With no documentation, there is no ability to comment on the organization. Score 0%.
Testing
49%
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 = 11,159 / 13,865 = 80% which gives a score of 80% as per guidance.
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
There is no indication of documented code coverage. Clearly there are tests, but only to 80%. This drives a score of 30%.
12. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
There is no test report to be found. Score 0%.
13. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
No evidence of formal verification found.
Security
86%
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 on two aspects of the software. Both audits appear to have taken place before deployment and code issues were resolved. Score 100%. There are other audits listed in the documentation. The links to these audits (all from the Solana.com website) are broken. Certainly this should be fixed. The audits that we found our not the same as the audits listed in the documentation. Some clarity on that aspect would also be useful.
15. Is there a matrix of audit applicability on deployed code (%)? Please refer to the example doc for reference.
With less than four audits (only two) there is no need for a matrix of audit applicability. The score defaults to 100% as per guidance.
16. Is the bug bounty value acceptably high (%)
There is an Immunifi bug bounty for 250 K valid. It is a pity that there is no link I could find in the documentation. I had to Google Immunifi and Jito to find it.
17. Is there documented protocol monitoring (%)?
No documentation of active protocol monitoring to allow quick reaction to security attacks was found. Score 0%.
18. Is there documented protocol front-end monitoring (%)?
No documentation of security monitoring of the front-end to advise users of front-end attacks could be found. Score 0%.
Admin Controls
0%
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? (%)
The code appears to be upgradable. There is no mention of the Multisig's, therefore we will assume updatable via EOA (or the Solana equivalent). Score 0%.
20. Is the protocol's code upgradeability clearly explained in non technical terms? (%)
There is no specific documentation on upgradability that I could find. In discussion on implementation of voted proposals, there is no specific information on how takes place.
21. Are the admin addresses, roles and capabilities clearly explained? (%)
There is no specific discussion of administrative addresses roles or capabilities. In the implementation section changes are implied to be done by the administrators, with no details. Score 0%.
22. Are the signers of the admin addresses clearly listed and provably distinct humans? (%)
There is no discussion on admin addresses or signers or Multisig's. As such, a score of 0% is unavoidable.
23. Is there a robust documented transaction signing policy? Please refer to the Example doc for reference.(%)
No discussion on signing policy or even Multisig's. As such, no transaction signing policy and a score of 0%.