PoolTogether Audit

OpenZeppelinFiles named in the report

Audit · firm’s term: audit

OpenZeppelin reviewed PoolTogether (PoolTogether Audit) on 16 Jan 2020: 12 findings, 0 critical; 11 marked fixed, 1 open.

No open critical findings
Open the reportOpen PoolTogether’s security record

Report hosted on blog.openzeppelin.com.

Trustblock does not review code.

Findings12

Statuses are the security firm’s own, from its report.

SeverityOpenAcknowledgedFixed
Critical000
High002
Medium002
Low107
High[H01] Users can influence the lottery winnerFixed

The report gives no description here.

High[H02] Winners can stall the systemFixed

The report gives no description here.

Medium[M01] Double counting rewardsFixed

The report gives no description here.

Medium[M02] Bypassing token eventsFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L02] Only direct deposits are pausableFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L03] Double spending ERC20 allowanceFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L04] Unexpected Side EffectsFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L05] Conflated balancesFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L06] Misleading comments and variable namesFixed

The report gives no description here.

Low[L07] Excessive code couplingFixed

The report gives no description here.

Show 1 more
Low[L08] Unchecked casting from uint256 to int256Fixed

The report gives no description here.

Contracts in scope

No deployed address is recorded for this audit.

The report names a repository or files. Open the report to see its scope.

Repository and files the report names (2)

  • contracts/BasePool.sol
  • contracts/DrawManager.sol

Part of PoolTogether’s security record

PoolTogether
Audits8 audits by 3 firmsLast audit May 2021, by Consensys.
Critical findings7 open critical findingsReported in 3 reports, the latest by Consensys, May 2021.
Open PoolTogether’s security record

Security firm

OpenZeppelin

67 projects reviewed · 184 reports · latest Aug 2026

See OpenZeppelin’s audits

Something wrong on this page? A missing report, a wrong date, a finding that was fixed since. Tell us and we check it against its source.

Tell us