Prepared by:
HALBORN
Last Updated Unknown date
Date of Engagement: October 9th, 2024 - October 23rd, 2024
100% of all REPORTED Findings have been addressed
All findings
11
Critical
0
High
1
Medium
4
Low
3
Informational
3
BSX engaged Halborn to conduct a security assessment on their smart contracts beginning on October 9th, 2024 and ending on October 23rd, 2024. The security assessment was scoped to the BSX Exchange smart contracts in the GitHub repository provided to the Halborn team. Commit hashes and further details can be found in the Scope section of this report.
Halborn was provided two weeks for the engagement and assigned one full-time security engineer to review the security of the smart contract in scope. The engineer is a blockchain and smart contract security expert with advanced penetration testing and smart contract hacking skills, and deep knowledge of multiple blockchain protocols.
The purpose of the assessment is to:
Identify potential security issues within the smart contracts.
Ensure that smart contract functionality operates as intended.
In summary, Halborn identified some improvements to reduce the likelihood and impact of risks, which were partially addressed by the BSX team. The main identified issues were the following:
Guarantee solvency when opening new positions
Disable intializers in contracts constructors
Initialize inherited contracts
Take all inputs into account when signing payloads to guarantee total integrity
Keep the storage variable in the same place between two versions of a contract
Prevent integer silent signed to unsigned casting
Halborn performed a combination of manual and automated security testing to balance efficiency, timeliness, practicality, and accuracy in regard to the scope of this assessment. While manual testing is recommended to uncover flaws in logic, process, and implementation; automated testing techniques help enhance coverage of the contracts' solidity code 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.
Smart contract manual code review and walk-through.
Manual assessment of use and safety for the critical Solidity variables and functions in scope to identify any arithmetic-related vulnerability classes.
Local testing with custom scripts (Foundry).
Fork testing against main networks (Foundry).
Static analysis of security for scoped contract, and imported functions
| EXPLOITABILITY METRIC () | METRIC VALUE | NUMERICAL 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 |
| IMPACT METRIC () | METRIC VALUE | NUMERICAL 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 |
| SEVERITY COEFFICIENT () | COEFFICIENT VALUE | NUMERICAL VALUE |
|---|---|---|
| Reversibility () | None (R:N) Partial (R:P) Full (R:F) | 1 0.5 0.25 |
| Scope () | Changed (S:C) Unchanged (S:U) | 1.25 1 |
| Severity | Score Value Range |
|---|---|
| Critical | 9 - 10 |
| High | 7 - 8.9 |
| Medium | 4.5 - 6.9 |
| Low | 2 - 4.4 |
| Informational | 0 - 1.9 |
Critical
0
High
1
Medium
4
Low
3
Informational
3
| Security analysis | Risk level | Remediation Date |
|---|---|---|
| BSX1000 solvency not guaranteed | High | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
| Missing constructor disabling initialization | Medium | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
| Missing initialization of inherited upgradable contracts | Medium | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
| Payloads to sign do not include all input parameters | Medium | Risk Accepted - 10/27/2024 |
| Removing storage variables in upgradable contracts | Medium | Risk Accepted - 10/27/2024 |
| Integer unsafe casting issues | Low | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
| Order fees are charged twice | Low | Risk Accepted - 10/27/2024 |
| Truncated balance not accrued to fund balance after withdrawal | Low | Risk Accepted - 10/27/2024 |
| ETH deposit does not validate the amount sent | Informational | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
| High fees can block the closing position process | Informational | Acknowledged - 10/27/2024 |
| Confusing error messages | Informational | Solved - 10/27/2024 |
//High
//Medium
//Medium
//Medium
//Medium
//Low
//Low
//Low
//Informational
//Informational
//Informational
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
Contracts Core and BSX Token (2nd round)
* Use Google Chrome for best results
** Check "Background Graphics" in the print settings if needed
