Skip to content

TEMPLATE.md

Latest commit

 

History

History
319 lines (232 loc) · 11 KB

TEMPLATE.md

File metadata and controls

319 lines (232 loc) · 11 KB

[Project Name] Security Audit Report

Report Information

Field Value
Audit Firm Mefai Security Research
Report Date [YYYY-MM-DD]
Report Version 1.0
Contract/Program [Address or N/A]
Chain [BSC / Ethereum / Solana / Multi-chain]
Language [Solidity / Rust / TypeScript / Mixed]
Compiler Version [e.g., solc 0.8.19, anchor 0.29.0]
Audit Type [Smart Contract / Token / Protocol / dApp / Infrastructure]
Methodology Manual Review + Automated Analysis
Audit Duration [X days]
Commit Hash [Git commit hash, if available]
Repository [GitHub URL, if public]
Classification [Public / Confidential]

Disclaimer

This report represents a point-in-time security assessment conducted by Mefai Security Research. The findings and recommendations contained herein are based on the information available and the state of the codebase at the time of the audit. This report does not constitute a guarantee that the audited system is free of vulnerabilities or defects. No part of this report should be considered as investment advice, an endorsement, or a recommendation regarding the security of any project, token, or protocol.

The scope of this audit was limited to the files, contracts, and components explicitly listed in the Scope section. Any code, infrastructure, or external dependencies outside the defined scope were not reviewed. Findings are classified by severity based on the potential impact and likelihood of exploitation at the time of analysis.

Mefai Security Research assumes no liability for any losses, damages, or adverse consequences resulting from the use of or reliance on this report. The responsibility for implementing fixes and maintaining security lies solely with the project team.

Executive Summary

[Provide a 2-3 paragraph overview covering: (1) what was audited and why, (2) summary of key findings and their severity distribution, (3) overall security posture and whether the project is considered safe for deployment in its current state.]

Risk Rating

Severity Count
Critical 0
High 0
Medium 0
Low 0
Informational 0
Total 0

Overall Risk Assessment: [Critical / High / Medium / Low]

[One-sentence justification for the overall risk rating.]

Scope

In Scope

File / Contract SHA-256 Lines of Code
ContractA.sol [hash] [LOC]
ContractB.sol [hash] [LOC]

Total Lines of Code: [X]

Out of Scope

  • [List contracts, modules, or components explicitly excluded]
  • Third-party dependencies and libraries (unless specified)
  • Frontend application code (unless specified)
  • Deployment scripts and infrastructure

Methodology

Manual Review

  • Line-by-line source code review
  • Business logic and state machine analysis
  • Access control and privilege escalation testing
  • Data validation and input sanitization review
  • Economic model and incentive analysis
  • Cross-contract interaction and composability review

Automated Analysis

  • Static analysis (tool-specific results documented in Appendix C)
  • Symbolic execution and constraint solving
  • Fuzzing and property-based testing
  • Bytecode verification against published source

Threat Modeling

  • Attack surface enumeration and entry point mapping
  • Known vulnerability pattern matching (SWC Registry, common Rust pitfalls)
  • Protocol-specific risk assessment (DeFi, NFT, bridge, etc.)
  • Economic attack vectors (flash loans, oracle manipulation, MEV)
  • Governance and centralization risk evaluation

Architecture Overview

[Describe the system architecture, including contract inheritance hierarchy, module dependencies, external integrations, and data flow between components.]

+------------------+       +------------------+       +------------------+
|                  |       |                  |       |                  |
|   Component A    +------>+   Component B    +------>+   Component C    |
|                  |       |                  |       |                  |
+------------------+       +------------------+       +------------------+
        |                          |
        v                          v
+------------------+       +------------------+
|                  |       |                  |
|   External Dep   |       |   Oracle/Feed    |
|                  |       |                  |
+------------------+       +------------------+

[Replace the diagram above with the actual architecture of the audited system.]

Findings

F-001: [Finding Title]

Attribute Value
Severity [Critical / High / Medium / Low / Informational]
Type [Reentrancy / Access Control / Logic Error / ...]
Location ContractName.sol:L42-L58
Status [Open / Acknowledged / Fixed / Disputed]
Fixed In [Commit hash, if applicable]

Description:

[Clear, technical explanation of the vulnerability or issue. Include the root cause and the conditions under which it manifests.]

Impact:

[Describe the potential consequences if this issue is exploited. Quantify the risk where possible (e.g., "all funds in the pool could be drained").]

Proof of Concept:

// Provide a minimal, reproducible demonstration of the vulnerability.
// Include attacker contract code, transaction sequence, or test case.

Recommendation:

[Specific, actionable remediation steps. Include code snippets showing the recommended fix where applicable.]

// Recommended fix

F-002: [Finding Title]

Attribute Value
Severity [Critical / High / Medium / Low / Informational]
Type [Category]
Location file.sol:L00
Status [Open / Acknowledged / Fixed / Disputed]
Fixed In [Commit hash, if applicable]

Description:

[Description]

Impact:

[Impact]

Recommendation:

[Recommendation]

[Continue with F-003, F-004, etc. as needed.]

Findings Summary

ID Title Severity Status
F-001 [Title] [Severity] [Status]
F-002 [Title] [Severity] [Status]

Appendix A: Severity Classification

Severity Description
Critical Direct loss of funds, complete protocol takeover, or irreversible systemic damage. Exploitation requires minimal effort or can be automated. Immediate remediation required before any deployment or continued operation.
High Significant risk to user funds, protocol integrity, or availability. Exploitation is feasible with moderate effort or under specific but realistic conditions. Must be resolved before mainnet deployment.
Medium Conditional risk requiring specific circumstances, user interaction, or a combination of factors to exploit. Material impact if triggered. Should be addressed before mainnet deployment.
Low Minor issues, best practice deviations, or theoretical risks with low probability and limited impact. Recommended to fix but not deployment-blocking.
Informational Code quality observations, gas optimizations, documentation gaps, or architectural suggestions. No direct security impact.

Appendix B: Audit Checklists

Smart Contract (EVM)

  • Reentrancy protection (checks-effects-interactions, ReentrancyGuard)
  • Integer overflow/underflow handling (SafeMath for pre-0.8.0)
  • Access control correctness (onlyOwner, role-based, multi-sig)
  • Unchecked external call return values
  • Delegatecall safety and context preservation
  • Front-running and MEV exposure
  • Flash loan attack vectors
  • Price oracle manipulation resistance
  • Proxy pattern and upgrade safety (storage collisions, initializers)
  • Token approval and allowance management
  • Centralization and single point of failure risks
  • Event emission for all state-changing operations
  • Gas optimization and DoS via block gas limit
  • Compiler version pinning and known compiler bugs
  • Correct use of visibility modifiers
  • Timestamp dependence and block number reliance
  • Proper use of msg.sender vs tx.origin
  • Self-destruct and contract balance assumptions
  • ERC standard compliance (ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155)
  • License and SPDX identifier

Token Specific

  • Mint authority and supply controls
  • Burn mechanism and authorization
  • Pause functionality and scope
  • Blacklist/whitelist capability and governance
  • Fee-on-transfer and deflationary mechanics
  • Maximum supply enforcement
  • Initial distribution and vesting schedules
  • Holder concentration analysis
  • Liquidity pool lock verification
  • Honeypot indicators (sell restrictions, hidden fees)

DeFi Protocol

  • Price oracle reliability and fallback mechanisms
  • Liquidation logic correctness and cascading risks
  • Slippage protection and sandwich attack resistance
  • Flash loan integration safety
  • Interest rate model correctness
  • Collateral ratio enforcement
  • Emergency shutdown and pause mechanisms
  • Fee calculation accuracy
  • Reward distribution fairness
  • Cross-protocol composability risks

Solana Program

  • Account ownership and discriminator validation
  • Signer and authority verification
  • PDA derivation and seed collision prevention
  • Arithmetic overflow with checked math
  • Program upgrade authority management
  • Mint and freeze authority configuration
  • CPI (Cross-Program Invocation) guard checks
  • Rent exemption verification
  • Account closing and lamport draining
  • Instruction data deserialization safety

Infrastructure and dApp

  • API key and credential exposure (frontend, source control)
  • Authentication and session management
  • Input validation and injection prevention
  • CORS and CSP configuration
  • Dependency vulnerability scanning
  • TLS/SSL configuration
  • Rate limiting and DoS protection
  • Error handling and information disclosure
  • Logging and monitoring coverage
  • Backup and recovery procedures

Appendix C: Tools Used

Tool Version Purpose
[e.g., Slither] [Version] Static analysis
[e.g., Mythril] [Version] Symbolic execution
[e.g., Echidna] [Version] Fuzzing
[e.g., Foundry] [Version] Testing framework
[Manual review] N/A Line-by-line code audit

Appendix D: Revision History

Version Date Author Changes
1.0 [YYYY-MM-DD] Mefai Security Research Initial report
1.1 [YYYY-MM-DD] Mefai Security Research [Description of changes]

Contact

Mefai Security Research

This report was prepared by Mefai Security Research. Unauthorized distribution or modification of this document is prohibited without prior written consent.
⚡