Voyager Token

Quantstamp12 Feb 2021Files named in the report

Quantstamp reviewed Voyager (Voyager Token) on 12 Feb 2021: 10 findings, 0 critical; 6 marked fixed, 2 acknowledged, 2 open.

No open critical findings

Open the report Open Voyager’s security record

Report hosted on certificate.quantstamp.com.

Trustblock does not review code.

Findings10

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	2
Low	2	2	2

LowAccruing Interest Starting Point Could Be In The PastOpen

In the `Staking` contract constructor, `_lastInterestAccruedTimestamp` could be set to be in the past, i.e., when `startingTimestamp < block.timestamp`. This seems incorrect, and could lead to unknown side effects.

LowIncreased Loss Of PrecisionOpen

The integer division in Solidity leads to a loss in precision due to the truncation of decimal digits. Therefore division should be always performed as the last arithmetic operation in any computation where this is possible. 1. `Staking._calculateAccruedInterest()` performs a multiplication on the result of a division: - `newBalance = newBalance.mul((uint256(1000000).add(_interestRateDaily)) ** daysRemain).div(1000000 ** daysRemain)` on L228 - `newBalance = newBalance.mul((uint256(1000000).add(_interestRateDaily)) ** 10).div(1000000 ** 10)` on L231 2. `Staking._calculateAccruedInterest()` performs a multiplication on the result of a division: - `daysElapsed = (block.timestamp.sub(_lastInterestAccruedTimestamp)).div(86400)` on L222 - `timestamp = _lastInterestAccruedTimestamp.add(daysElapsed.mul(86400))` on L237.