← Back to Audits

Autheo Platform - Autheo

Prepared by:

Halborn Logo

HALBORN

Last Updated Unknown date

Date of Engagement: January 13th, 2025 - January 17th, 2025

Summary

100% of all REPORTED Findings have been addressed

All findings

2

Critical

0

High

0

Medium

0

Low

0

Informational

2

Table of Contents

1. Introduction

Autheo engaged Halborn to conduct a security assessment on their app chain module beginning on January 13th, 2025 and ending on January 23rd, 2025. The security assessment was scoped to the Cosmos-SDK Golang application provided to the Halborn team. Commit hashes and further details can be found in the Scope section of this report.


2. Assessment Summary

The team at Halborn was provided two weeks for the engagement and assigned two full-time security engineers to assess the security of the Autheo platform. The security engineers are blockchain and smart-contract security experts with advanced penetration testing and smart-contract hacking experience, and deep knowledge of multiple blockchain protocols.

The purpose of this assessment is to:

    • Ensure that the Golang components and Smart Contracts operate as intended.

    • Identify potential security issues with the Cosmos application and Smart Contracts in scope.


In summary, Halborn identified some improvements to reduce the likelihood and impact of risks, which were partially addressed by the Autheo team. The main ones were the following: 

    • Lock the pragma version to the same version used during development and testing.

    • Modify the SetGuageWithLabels function in the telemetry package to accept the float64 data type.


3. Test Approach and Methodology

Halborn performed a combination of manual and automated security testing to balance efficiency, timeliness, practicality, and accuracy in regard to the scope of the custom modules. While manual testing is recommended to uncover flaws in logic, process, and implementation; automated testing techniques help enhance coverage of structures and can quickly identify items that do not follow security best practices. The following phases and associated tools were used throughout the term of the assessment :

    • Research into architecture and purpose.

    • Static Analysis of security for scoped repository, and imported functions. (e.g., staticcheck, gosec...)

    • Manual Assessment for discovering security vulnerabilities on the codebase.

    • Ensuring the correctness of the codebase.

    • Dynamic Analysis of files and modules in scope.

4. RISK METHODOLOGY

Every vulnerability and issue observed by Halborn is ranked based on two sets of Metrics and a Severity Coefficient. This system is inspired by the industry standard Common Vulnerability Scoring System.
The two Metric sets are: Exploitability and Impact. Exploitability captures the ease and technical means by which vulnerabilities can be exploited and Impact describes the consequences of a successful exploit.
The Severity Coefficients is designed to further refine the accuracy of the ranking with two factors: Reversibility and Scope. These capture the impact of the vulnerability on the environment as well as the number of users and smart contracts affected.
The final score is a value between 0-10 rounded up to 1 decimal place and 10 corresponding to the highest security risk. This provides an objective and accurate rating of the severity of security vulnerabilities in smart contracts.
The system is designed to assist in identifying and prioritizing vulnerabilities based on their level of risk to address the most critical issues in a timely manner.

4.1 EXPLOITABILITY

Attack Origin (AO):
Captures whether the attack requires compromising a specific account.
Attack Cost (AC):
Captures the cost of exploiting the vulnerability incurred by the attacker relative to sending a single transaction on the relevant blockchain. Includes but is not limited to financial and computational cost.
Attack Complexity (AX):
Describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Includes but is not limited to macro situation, available third-party liquidity and regulatory challenges.
Metrics:
EXPLOITABILITY METRIC (mem_e)METRIC VALUENUMERICAL VALUE
Attack Origin (AO)Arbitrary (AO:A)
Specific (AO:S)		1
0.2
Attack Cost (AC)Low (AC:L)
Medium (AC:M)
High (AC:H)		1
0.67
0.33
Attack Complexity (AX)Low (AX:L)
Medium (AX:M)
High (AX:H)		1
0.67
0.33
Exploitability EE is calculated using the following formula:

E=∏meE = \prod m_e

4.2 IMPACT

Confidentiality (C):
Measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by the contract due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. Confidentiality refers to limiting access to authorized users only.
Integrity (I):
Measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of data stored and/or processed on-chain. Integrity impact directly affecting Deposit or Yield records is excluded.
Availability (A):
Measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. This metric refers to smart contract features and functionality, not state. Availability impact directly affecting Deposit or Yield is excluded.
Deposit (D):
Measures the impact to the deposits made to the contract by either users or owners.
Yield (Y):
Measures the impact to the yield generated by the contract for either users or owners.
Metrics:
IMPACT METRIC (mIm_I)METRIC VALUENUMERICAL VALUE
Confidentiality (C)None (C:N)
Low (C:L)
Medium (C:M)
High (C:H)
Critical (C:C)		0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Integrity (I)None (I:N)
Low (I:L)
Medium (I:M)
High (I:H)
Critical (I:C)		0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Availability (A)None (A:N)
Low (A:L)
Medium (A:M)
High (A:H)
Critical (A:C)		0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Deposit (D)None (D:N)
Low (D:L)
Medium (D:M)
High (D:H)
Critical (D:C)		0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Yield (Y)None (Y:N)
Low (Y:L)
Medium (Y:M)
High (Y:H)
Critical (Y:C)		0
0.25
0.5
0.75
1
Impact II is calculated using the following formula:

I=max(mI)+∑mI−max(mI)4I = max(m_I) + \frac{\sum{m_I} - max(m_I)}{4}

4.3 SEVERITY COEFFICIENT

Reversibility (R):
Describes the share of the exploited vulnerability effects that can be reversed. For upgradeable contracts, assume the contract private key is available.
Scope (S):
Captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable contract impacts resources in other contracts.
Metrics:
SEVERITY COEFFICIENT (CC)COEFFICIENT VALUENUMERICAL VALUE
Reversibility (rr)None (R:N)
Partial (R:P)
Full (R:F)		1
0.5
0.25
Scope (ss)Changed (S:C)
Unchanged (S:U)		1.25
1
Severity Coefficient CC is obtained by the following product:

C=rsC = rs

The Vulnerability Severity Score SS is obtained by:

S=min(10,EIC∗10)S = min(10, EIC * 10)

The score is rounded up to 1 decimal places.
SeverityScore Value Range
Critical9 - 10
High7 - 8.9
Medium4.5 - 6.9
Low2 - 4.4
Informational0 - 1.9

5. SCOPE

REPOSITORY
(a) Repository: testnet
(b) Assessed Commit ID: c711602
(c) Items in scope:
  • docs/docs.go
  • testutil/simapp/simapp.go
  • proto/e2ee/query.proto
↓ Expand ↓
Out-of-Scope: Third party dependencies.
Out-of-Scope: New features/implementations after the remediation commit IDs.

6. Assessment Summary & Findings Overview

Critical

0

High

0

Medium

0

Low

0

Informational

2

Security analysisRisk levelRemediation Date
Floating pragmaInformationalSolved - 01/30/2025
Integer truncationInformationalAcknowledged - 01/30/2025

7. Findings & Tech Details

7.1 Floating pragma

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
References
autheo-platform/testnet/contracts/src/ModuleAUTHEO21.sol#L1
autheo-platform/testnet/contracts/src/ModuleAUTHEO20ProxyAuthority.sol#L1
autheo-platform/testnet/contracts/src/ModuleAUTHEO20Proxy.sol#L1
autheo-platform/testnet/contracts/src/ModuleAUTHEO20.t.sol#L1
autheo-platform/testnet/contracts/src/ModuleAUTHEO20.sol#L1
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/Bank.sol#L2
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/CosmosTypes.sol#L2
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/ICA.sol#L2
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/ICACallback.sol#L2
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/Relayer.sol#L2
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/events/bindings/src/RelayerFunctions.sol#L2

7.2 Integer truncation

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
References
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/keeper/ibc.go#L70
autheo-platform/testnet/x/autheo/keeper/ibc.go#L151

Halborn strongly recommends conducting a follow-up assessment of the project either within six months or immediately following any material changes to the codebase, whichever comes first. This approach is crucial for maintaining the project’s integrity and addressing potential vulnerabilities introduced by code modifications.

// Download the full report

Autheo Platform

* Use Google Chrome for best results

** Check "Background Graphics" in the print settings if needed

© Halborn 2025. All rights reserved.