Staking Contract - Dappos

1. INTRODUCTION

Dappos engaged Halborn to perform a security assessment of their smart contracts on July 28th, 2026. 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 Dappos codebase in scope consists of a smart contract implementing a multi-position staking mechanism where each stake linearly unlocks its locked amount between a start and end timestamp and can be withdrawn incrementally.

2. ASSESSMENT SUMMARY

Halborn was allocated 1 day 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, which were acknowledged by the Dappos team. The main recommendations were:

• In Staking.stake(), record the position amount as the actual balance delta by measuring stakingToken.balanceOf(address(this)) immediately before and after the safeTransferFrom call.

• In Staking.stake(), require that amount >= (t1 - t0) so at least one base unit unlocks per second and the linear formula never truncates to zero across the whole window.

• In Staking.stake(), enforce a maximum number of open positions per account, and add offset and limit pagination parameters to Staking.info() so callers can read positions in bounded batches rather than loading the entire array in a single call.

3. TEST APPROACH AND METHODOLODY

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).