CertiK reviewed Balto Coin Official (Balto - audit) on 29 Nov 2024: 5 findings, 0 critical; 1 marked fixed, 4 acknowledged.
Report hosted on skynet.certik.com.
Trustblock does not review code.
Statuses are the security firm’s own, from its report.
| Severity | Open | Acknowledged | Fixed |
|---|---|---|---|
| Critical | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| High | 0 | 1 | 1 |
| Medium | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Low | 0 | 3 | 0 |
All of the `359015678856 * 10**9` tokens are sent to the contract deployer or one or several externally-owned account (EOA) addresses. This is a centralization risk because the deployer or the owner(s) of the EOAs can distribute tokens without obtaining the consensus of the community. Any compromise to these addresses may allow a hacker to steal and sell tokens on the market, resulting in severe damage to the project.
In the Uniswap AMM system, a deadline is typically set for token swaps to prevent transactions from being executed after a certain amount of time, which could result in unfavorable price slippage. However, in the current contract, when conducting transactions using the Uniswap function, the deadline is set to `block.timestamp` or more than `block.timstamp`, meaning `the deadline check will pass whatever block the transaction is in` due to the check of deadline `require(deadline >= block.timestamp, 'UniswapV2Router: EXPIRED')` which will always pass. If bots and maximal extractable value (MEV) strategies are widely used, it could affect many transactions. A malicious miner can hold the transaction as he wants to incur the maximum loss is reached. Therefore, the absence or incorrect usage of a deadline could make transactions more susceptible to front-running / MEV attacks, leading to greater price slippage losses.
A sandwich attack can occur when an attacker notices a transaction involving token swaps or liquidity additions that lacks slippage restrictions or minimum output amount settings. The attacker can exploit this by frontrunning the transaction to purchase one of the assets, thereby manipulating the exchange rate, and then backrunning the transaction to sell the asset for a profit. The referenced functions are invoked without setting slippage restrictions or minimum output amounts, making transactions that trigger these functions particularly vulnerable to sandwich attacks, especially when large input amounts are involved.
The current implementation of the `if` clause is redundant and is not taking any effect. It can be simply removed, making the code clearer and more straightforward.
| Address | Chain | Source code |
|---|---|---|
| 0xc773…d13b0xc77336fdd91e22c737b0f5ec33f4c429caa1d13b | Chain: Ethereum | Source code: Verified source |
1,044 projects reviewed · 1,375 reports · latest May 2025
See CertiK’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