Spicenet security review
Audit · firm’s term: security review
Pashov Audit Group reviewed Spicenet (Spicenet security review) on 10 Apr 2026: 15 findings, 0 critical; 11 marked fixed, 4 acknowledged.
No open critical findings
Open the reportOpen Spicenet’s security record
Report hosted on GitHub.
Trustblock does not review code.
Findings15
Statuses are the security firm’s own, from its report.
| Severity | Open | Acknowledged | Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| High | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Medium | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Low | 0 | 4 | 6 |
LowHardcoded user address in ExecuteIntentAuth restricts chain-agnostic designAcknowledged
The report gives no description here.
LowInadequate validation in update_mapping function for token removalAcknowledged
The report gives no description here.
LowPer-user withdrawal history grows unbounded with O(n) rewrite cost per requestAcknowledged
The report gives no description here.
LowZero-amount deposits and withdrawals are acceptedAcknowledged
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.
Part of Spicenet’s security record
SpicenetAudits1 audit by 1 firmLast audit Apr 2026, by Pashov Audit Group.
Critical findingsNo open critical findingsIn 1 report.
Open Spicenet’s security recordSecurity firm
Pashov Audit Group86 projects reviewed · 165 reports · latest Aug 2026
See Pashov Audit Group’s auditsSomething 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