Quantstamp Smart Contract Audit Report
Quantstamp Score
Pass! No vulnerabilities detected
+-3
ASF
+-3
TID
+-3
TOD
+-3
SDC
+-3
REE
0
Total
MICE
0xbb393420f82b49EF5F68acCaa56C417cDD43CCC4 Submitted by Pablocervera
Smart Contract Audit Report
2018-06-03 Quantstamp version 0.1
What you are looking at and why it matters.

This report lists the potential vulnerabilities found in the smart contract you submitted as well as any library contracts it called. We also give hints to the developer about how to write better contracts. To the extent that that any software or components in the library contracts are subject to open source or other third party license terms, you are responsible for reviewing and determining compliance with such terms.

Our mission at Quantstamp is to give you the knowledge and power over your own security. By creating automated tools and allowing you to release the reports to the public, we hope to give you the tools to protect the projects you care about, and ask good questions.

This report is our first iteration out of many, feedback is appreciated.

MICE

0xbb393420f82b49EF5F68acCaa56C417cDD43CCC4
Completed on 2018-06-03 | Quantstamp version 0.1

1 contract was audited

0 warnings were detected


How to read this report (PDF)

Vulnerability Review

Number of warnings

A critical flaw where one contract exploits the execution state of another contract. Overall Severity: Critical

Is this smart contract at risk?

Critical in all cases because reentrancy takes little skill to exploit once discovered by an attacker. It is relatively prevalent in smart contracts.

A flaw in how a library contract delegates its functions to smart contracts that invoke it. Overall Severity: Critical

Is this smart contract at risk?

Critical in all cases because it jeopardizes not only the library contract but every contract that calls it. It may allow ownership to transfer to an unknown person, or permit a similarly catastophic exploit.

An uncommon flaw that allows a miner to manipulate a transaction's output by its timestamp. Overall Severity: Low

Is this smart contract at risk?

Critical in cases where value is transferred by a function that depends on the results of another function. Examples: decentralized exchanges, games or contests.

Medium to Low in cases that do not involve transferring value. May negatively impact people who feel cheated even without staking.

A bug that changes the result of a transaction depending on when it executes within a block. Overall Severity: Medium

Is this smart contract at risk?

Critical in the unlikely case that a timestamp triggers a critical operation such as transferring value.

Low in all other cases. Found very rarely in published contracts.

An indication that another, potentially critical flaw occurred upstream. Overall Severity: Medium

Is this smart contract at risk?

Medium to Critical in all cases. An assertion failure warrants attention because it signals the smart contract may have other, more critical vulnerabilities.

What you are looking at and why it matters.

This report lists the potential vulnerabilities found in the smart contract you submitted as well as any library contracts it called. We also give hints to the developer about how to write better contracts. To the extent that that any software or components in the library contracts are subject to open source or other third party license terms, you are responsible for reviewing and determining compliance with such terms.

Our mission at Quantstamp is to give you the knowledge and power over your own security. By creating automated tools and allowing you to release the reports to the public, we hope to give you the tools to protect the projects you care about, and ask good questions.

This report is our first iteration out of many, feedback is appreciated.