Solutions

Company

Resources

Blog

Contact

Login

    • Assurance

      Smart Contract Assessment

      Securing code integrity, protecting digital assets

      Blockchain Layer 1 Assessment

      Assessing protocols, securing blockchain foundations

      Code Security Audit

      Uncovering flaws, strengthening software integrity

      Web Application Penetration Testing

      Exposing weaknesses, fortifying digital defenses

      Cloud Infrastructure Penetration Testing

      Securing configurations, protecting critical environments

      Red Team Exercise

      Simulating real-world attacks, strengthening defenses

      AI Red Teaming

      Testing AI systems against real threats

      AI Security Assessment

      Securing AI models, data, and pipelines

    • Advisory

      AI Advisory

      Guiding secure, strategic AI adoption forward

      Risk Assessment

      From unknown threats to actionable insights

      Blockchain Architecture Assessment

      Optimizing architecture for tomorrow’s networks

      Compliance Readiness

      Stay ready as regulations evolve

      Custody and Key Management Assessment

      Securing the heart of digital custody

      Technical Due Diligence

      See the risks before you invest

      Technical Training

      Empower your teams to secure what matters

    • Who We Are

      The best security engineers in the world

      Careers

      Work with the elite

      Who Trusts Us

      The trusted security advisor for blockchain and financial services industries

      Brand

      Access official logos, fonts, and guidelines

      Service Commitments

      Committed to Protecting Your Data

    • Audits

      In-depth evaluations of smart contracts and blockchain infrastructures

      BVSS

      Blockchain Vulnerability Scoring System

      Disclosures

      All the latest vulnerabilities discovered by Halborn

      Case Studies

      How Halborn’s solutions have empowered clients to overcome security issues

      Reports

      Comprehensive reports and data

  • Blog

  • Contact

  • Login

THIS WEBSITE USES COOKIES

We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners who may combine it with other information that you've provided to them or that they've collected from your use of their services. You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website. Learn More.

STAY CURRENT WITH HALBORN

Subscribe to the monthly Halborn Digest for our top blogs and videos, major company announcements, new whitepapers, webinar and event invites, and one exclusive interview.

ADVISORY SERVICES

AI AdvisoryRisk AssessmentBlockchain Architecture AssessmentCompliance ReadinessCustody and Key Management AssessmentTechnical Due DiligenceTechnical Training

ASSURANCE SERVICES

AI Security AssessmentAI Red TeamingSmart Contract AssessmentBlockchain Layer 1 AssessmentCode Security AuditWeb Application Penetration TestingCloud Infrastructure Penetration TestingRed Team Exercise

COMPANY

Who We AreWho Trusts UsService CommitmentsCareersBrandBlogContact

RESOURCES

AuditsDisclosuresReportsBVSSCase Studies
Halborn Logo
Privacy PolicyTerms of UseVulnerability Disclosure Policy

© Halborn 2025. All rights reserved.

Background

// Security Assessment

09.03.2025 - 09.16.2025

Earn V2 Core - Standard Implementation

Blueprint Finance

Halborn logotext
← Back to Audits

Earn V2 Core - Standard Implementation - Blueprint Finance


Prepared by:

Halborn Logo

HALBORN

Last Updated 10/10/2025

Date of Engagement: September 3rd, 2025 - September 16th, 2025

Summary

100% of all REPORTED Findings have been addressed

All findings

12

Critical

0

High

0

Medium

0

Low

3

Informational

9


Table of Contents

  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Assessment summary
  • 3. Test approach and methodology
  • 4. Risk methodology
  • 5. Scope
  • 6. Assessment summary & findings overview
  • 7. Findings & Tech Details
    1. 7.1 Strategy can be removed while still holding allocated funds
    2. 7.2 Lack of non-zero output checks in deposit and redeem can result in user asset loss
    3. 7.3 Unlimited approval risks in allocatemodule
    4. 7.4 Unused high-water mark in performance fee calculation
    5. 7.5 Strategy allocation accounting can be manipulated by strategy contracts
    6. 7.6 Mismatch in performance fee preview vs accrual and liquidity preview vs execution
    7. 7.7 Hooks can affect share/asset conversion by altering vault balance
    8. 7.8 Deallocation order can contain stale, missing, or duplicate strategies
    9. 7.9 Comment/code mismatch
    10. 7.10 Setdeallocationorder will revert if more than 255 strategies are passed
    11. 7.11 Floating pragma
    12. 7.12 Unused imports
  • 8. Automated Testing

1. Introduction

Blueprint Finance engaged Halborn to perform a security assessment of their smart contracts from September 3rd, 2025 to September 16th, 2025. The assessment scope was limited to the smart contracts provided to Halborn. Commit hashes and additional details are available in the Scope section of this report.

  

The Blueprint Finance codebase in scope consists of smart contracts implementing a modular, upgradeable ERC4626 vault system with strategy allocation, hooks, role-based access control, and factory-managed proxy deployment.

2. Assessment Summary

Halborn was allocated 10 days for this engagement and assigned 1 full-time security engineer to conduct a comprehensive review of the smart contracts within scope. The engineer is an expert in blockchain and smart contract security, with advanced skills in penetration testing and smart contract exploitation, as well as extensive knowledge of multiple blockchain protocols.


The objectives of this assessment are to:

    • Identify potential security vulnerabilities within the smart contracts.

    • Verify that the smart contract functionality operates as intended.


In summary, Halborn identified several areas for improvement to reduce the likelihood and impact of security risks. These were partially addressed by the Blueprint Finance team. The primary recommendations were:

    • Integrate the performanceFeeHighWaterMark variable into the performance fee logic.

    • Require that allocated == 0 before allowing a strategy to be removed, regardless of its status. Remove the exception for Halted status.

    • Update allocation logic to compare the vault's asset balance before and after the call, and use the actual delta for allocated updates.

    • Require that a strategy is not present in deallocationOrder before allowing its removal, regardless of its status. Alternatively, automatically remove the strategy from deallocationOrder as part of the removal process to ensure consistency.


3. Test Approach and Methodology

Halborn conducted a combination of manual code review and automated security testing to balance efficiency, timeliness, practicality, and accuracy within the scope of this assessment. While manual testing is crucial for identifying flaws in logic, processes, and implementation, automated testing enhances coverage of smart contracts and quickly detects deviations from established security best practices.

The following phases and associated tools were employed throughout the term of the assessment:

    • Research into the platform's architecture, purpose and use.

    • Manual code review and walkthrough of smart contracts to identify any logical issues.

    • Comprehensive assessment of the safety and usage of critical Solidity variables and functions within scope that could lead to arithmetic-related vulnerabilities.

    • Local testing using custom scripts (Foundry).

    • Fork testing against main networks (Foundry).

    • Static security analysis of scoped contracts, and imported functions (Slither).


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_eme​)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 EEE is calculated using the following formula:

E=∏meE = \prod m_eE=∏me​

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_ImI​)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 III is calculated using the following formula:

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

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 (CCC)COEFFICIENT VALUENUMERICAL VALUE
Reversibility (rrr)None (R:N)
Partial (R:P)
Full (R:F)
1
0.5
0.25
Scope (sss)Changed (S:C)
Unchanged (S:U)
1.25
1
Severity Coefficient CCC is obtained by the following product:

C=rsC = rsC=rs

The Vulnerability Severity Score SSS is obtained by:

S=min(10,EIC∗10)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: earn-v2-core
(b) Assessed Commit ID: b1b7cec
(c) Items in scope:
  • src/common/UpgradeableVault.sol
  • src/factory/ConcreteFactory.sol
  • src/factory/VaultProxy.sol
  • src/implementation/ConcreteStandardVaultImpl.sol
  • src/lib/storage/ConcreteCachedVaultStateStorageLib.sol
  • src/lib/storage/ConcreteFactoryBaseStorageLib.sol
  • src/lib/storage/ConcreteStandardVaultImplStorageLib.sol
  • src/lib/Constants.sol
  • src/lib/Conversion.sol
  • src/lib/Hooks.sol
  • src/lib/Roles.sol
  • src/lib/StateSetterLib.sol
  • src/lib/Time.sol
  • src/module/AllocateModule.sol
  • src/common/UpgradeableVault.sol
  • src/factory/ConcreteFactory.sol
  • src/factory/VaultProxy.sol
↓ Expand ↓
Out-of-Scope: Third party dependencies and economic attacks.
Remediation Commit ID:
  • 4f64163
Out-of-Scope: New features/implementations after the remediation commit IDs.

6. Assessment Summary & Findings Overview

Critical

0

High

0

Medium

0

Low

3

Informational

9

Security analysisRisk levelRemediation Date
Strategy can be removed while still holding allocated fundsLowRisk Accepted - 10/03/2025
Lack of non-zero output checks in deposit and redeem can result in user asset lossLowSolved - 10/03/2025
Unlimited approval risks in AllocateModuleLowRisk Accepted - 10/03/2025
Unused high-water mark in performance fee calculationInformationalAcknowledged - 09/26/2025
Strategy allocation accounting can be manipulated by strategy contractsInformationalAcknowledged - 10/03/2025
Mismatch in performance fee preview vs accrual and liquidity preview vs executionInformationalAcknowledged - 10/03/2025
Hooks can affect share/asset conversion by altering vault balanceInformationalAcknowledged - 10/03/2025
Deallocation order can contain stale, missing, or duplicate strategiesInformationalAcknowledged - 10/03/2025
Comment/code mismatchInformationalSolved - 10/03/2025
setDeallocationOrder will revert if more than 255 strategies are passedInformationalSolved - 10/03/2025
Floating pragmaInformationalAcknowledged - 10/03/2025
Unused importsInformationalSolved - 10/03/2025

7. Findings & Tech Details

7.1 Strategy can be removed while still holding allocated funds

//

Low

Description
BVSS
AO:S/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:C/Y:C (2.5)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.2 Lack of non-zero output checks in deposit and redeem can result in user asset loss

//

Low

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:L/Y:N (2.5)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
Remediation Hash
https://github.com/Blueprint-Finance/earn-v2-core/commit/4f64163e85945785dc6133e6cb0b172dd814f4d0

7.3 Unlimited approval risks in AllocateModule

//

Low

Description
BVSS
AO:S/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:C/Y:N (2.0)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.4 Unused high-water mark in performance fee calculation

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:M/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:N/Y:L (1.7)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.5 Strategy allocation accounting can be manipulated by strategy contracts

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:S/AC:L/AX:M/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:C/Y:N (1.3)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.6 Mismatch in performance fee preview vs accrual and liquidity preview vs execution

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:L/R:F/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:L/D:N/Y:N (0.6)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.7 Hooks can affect share/asset conversion by altering vault balance

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:S/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:L/Y:L (0.6)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.8 Deallocation order can contain stale, missing, or duplicate strategies

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:S/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:L/D:N/Y:N (0.5)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.9 Comment/code mismatch

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:M/R:F/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:L/D:N/Y:N (0.4)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
Remediation Hash
https://github.com/Blueprint-Finance/earn-v2-core/commit/4f64163e85945785dc6133e6cb0b172dd814f4d0

7.10 setDeallocationOrder will revert if more than 255 strategies are passed

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:N/Y:N (0.0)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
Remediation Hash
https://github.com/Blueprint-Finance/earn-v2-core/commit/4f64163e85945785dc6133e6cb0b172dd814f4d0

7.11 Floating pragma

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:L/R:P/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:N/Y:N (0.0)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment

7.12 Unused imports

//

Informational

Description
BVSS
AO:A/AC:L/AX:L/R:N/S:U/C:N/A:N/I:N/D:N/Y:N (0.0)
Recommendation
Remediation Comment
Remediation Hash
https://github.com/Blueprint-Finance/earn-v2-core/commit/4f64163e85945785dc6133e6cb0b172dd814f4d0

8. Automated Testing

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.

Table of Contents

  • 1. Introduction
  • 2. Assessment summary
  • 3. Test approach and methodology
  • 4. Risk methodology
  • 5. Scope
  • 6. Assessment summary & findings overview
  • 7. Findings & Tech Details
    1. 7.1 Strategy can be removed while still holding allocated funds
    2. 7.2 Lack of non-zero output checks in deposit and redeem can result in user asset loss
    3. 7.3 Unlimited approval risks in allocatemodule
    4. 7.4 Unused high-water mark in performance fee calculation
    5. 7.5 Strategy allocation accounting can be manipulated by strategy contracts
    6. 7.6 Mismatch in performance fee preview vs accrual and liquidity preview vs execution
    7. 7.7 Hooks can affect share/asset conversion by altering vault balance
    8. 7.8 Deallocation order can contain stale, missing, or duplicate strategies
    9. 7.9 Comment/code mismatch
    10. 7.10 Setdeallocationorder will revert if more than 255 strategies are passed
    11. 7.11 Floating pragma
    12. 7.12 Unused imports
  • 8. Automated Testing

// Download the full report

Earn V2 Core - Standard Implementation

* Use Google Chrome for best results

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