PoolTogether - LootBox and MultipleWinners Strateg

ConsensysFiles named in the report

Consensys reviewed PoolTogether (PoolTogether - LootBox and MultipleWinners Strateg) on 1 Nov 2020: 23 findings, 2 critical; none marked fixed.

2 open critical findings
Open the reportOpen PoolTogether’s security record

Report hosted on diligence.security.

Trustblock does not review code.

Findings23

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

SeverityOpenAcknowledgedFixed
Critical200
High300
Medium500
Low1300
CriticalLootBox - Unprotected selfdestruct in proxy implementationOpen

The report gives no description here.

CriticalPeriodicPrizeStrategy - RNG failure can lock user fundsOpen

The report gives no description here.

HighPeriodicPriceStrategy - trustedForwarder can impersonate any msg.senderOpen

The report gives no description here.

HighTicket duplicationOpen

The report gives no description here.

HighUnpredictable behavior for users due to admin front running or general bad timingOpen

The report gives no description here.

MediumLootBox - plunder should disallow plundering to address(0)Open

The report gives no description here.

MediumMultipleWinners - setNumberOfWinners does not enforce count>0Open

The report gives no description here.

MediumPeriodicPriceStrategy - addExternalErc721Award duplicate or invalid tokenIds may block award phaseOpen

The report gives no description here.

MediumPeriodicPrizeStrategy - Token with callback related warnings (ERC777 a.o.)Open

The report gives no description here.

MediumPeriodicPrizeStrategy - unbounded external tokens linked list may be used to force a gas DoSOpen

The report gives no description here.

Show 10 more
LowCheck codesize before adding listenersOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowClean up unused source-units in the repositoryOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowInitialize implementations for proxy contracts and protect initialization methodsOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowLootBox - executeCalls can be misused to relay callsOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowLootBox - transferEther should be internalOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowLootBox - unnecessary payableOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowMultipleWinners - Awards can be guaranteed with a set number of ticketsOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowMultipleWinners - Inconsistent behavior compared to SingleRandomWinnerOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowPeriodicPrizeStrategy - Inconsistent behavior between award-phase modifiers and view functionsOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowReconsider the use of proxy factories in the system if they are not neededOpen

The report gives no description here.

Show 3 more
LowRework the repository structure and clearly mark which 3rd party contracts have been modifiedOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowStick to clear interface naming conventionsOpen

The report gives no description here.

LowWhere possible, functions should accept a specific contract type rather than address parametersOpen

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.

Repository and files the report names (5)

  • pool/contracts/prize-strategy/multiple-winners/MultipleWinners.sol
  • pool/contracts/builders/MultipleWinnersBuilder.sol
  • pool/contracts/prize-strategy/multiple-winners/MultipleWinnersProxyFactory.sol
  • pool/contracts/prize-strategy/PeriodicPrizeStrategyListener.sol
  • pool/contracts/prize-strategy/PeriodicPrizeStrategy.sol

Part of PoolTogether’s security record

PoolTogether
Audits8 audits by 3 firmsLast audit May 2021, by Consensys.
Critical findings7 open critical findingsReported in 3 reports, the latest by Consensys, May 2021.
Open PoolTogether’s security record

Security firm

Consensys

41 projects reviewed · 59 reports · latest Oct 2024

See Consensys’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