Atlendis Labs security review

Nethermind SecurityCode version: not recorded (see the report)

Audit · firm’s term: security review

Nethermind Security reviewed Atlendis (Atlendis Labs security review) on 16 May 2023: 8 findings, 0 critical; 6 marked fixed, 2 acknowledged.

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

Report hosted on GitHub.

Trustblock does not review code.

Findings8

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

SeverityOpenAcknowledgedFixed
Critical000
High010
Medium004
Low012

Marked Info or Best Practices by the firm. Not counted as findings.

InfoPoolTokenFeesController deployment args must align with token decimalsAcknowledged

The report gives no description here.

InfoGranting and revoking governance roleFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoInconsistent minDepositAmount input validationFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoSetting minDepositAmount = 0 could cause the position counting to behave incorrectlyFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoShadowing local variablesFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoThe conditions in the withdraw(...) function’s if-else block can be simplifiedFixed

The report gives no description here.

Best PracticesUnused library import in RCLBorrowersFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoUsage of deprecated safeApproveFixed

The report gives no description here.

InfoZeroed EXIT_FEES_INFLECTION_THRESHOLD might lead to inaccurate exit fee calculationFixed

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 Atlendis’s security record

Atlendis
Audits2 audits by 2 firmsLast audit May 2023, by Nethermind Security.
Critical findingsNo open critical findingsAcross 2 reports.
Open Atlendis’s security record

Security firm

Nethermind Security

57 projects reviewed · 81 reports · latest Sep 2026

See Nethermind Security’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