Resolv security review

Pashov Audit GroupCode version: not recorded (see the report)

Audit · firm’s term: security review

Pashov Audit Group reviewed Resolv USR (Resolv security review) on 1 Sep 2024: 19 findings, 0 critical; 9 marked fixed, 10 acknowledged.

No open critical findings
Open the reportOpen Resolv USR’s security record

Report hosted on GitHub.

Trustblock does not review code.

Findings19

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

SeverityOpenAcknowledgedFixed
Critical000
High000
Medium005
Low0104
MediumBurning could be DOSed in case a large number of burn requests are processedFixed

The report gives no description here.

MediumIncorrect stake limit checkFixed

The report gives no description here.

MediumNo mechanism to exit isolation mode once enteredFixed

The report gives no description here.

MediumUsers' funds may be temporarily frozen when the treasury lacks fundsFixed

The report gives no description here.

MediumWithdrawal of collateral should not be restricted to only allowed providersFixed

The report gives no description here.

LowImpossible to decrease allowance for delisted spendersFixed

The report gives no description here.

LowMissing rate mode assertion in getCurrentDebtFixed

The report gives no description here.

LowRLP can be added as collateral token in LPExternalRequestsManagerFixed

The report gives no description here.

LowSuperfluous ERC20 approval in aaveBorrowFixed

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 Resolv USR’s security record

Resolv USR
Audits7 audits by 1 firmLast audit Jul 2025, by Pashov Audit Group.
Critical findingsNo open critical findingsAcross the 7 reports, 1 critical finding was reported. It is marked fixed by the firm that reported it.
Open Resolv USR’s security record

Security firm

Pashov Audit Group

86 projects reviewed · 165 reports · latest Aug 2026

See Pashov Audit Group’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