This is a Process Quality Review of Set Protocol completed on November 9, 2020. It was performed using the Process Review process (version 0.6) and is documented here. The review was performed by ShinkaRex of Caliburn Consulting. Check out our Telegram.

The final score of the review is 84%, a solid pass. The breakdown of the scoring is in Scoring Appendix.

Summary of the Process

Very simply, the review looks for the following declarations from the developer's site. With these declarations, it is reasonable to trust the smart contracts.

• Here are my smart contracts on the blockchain

• Here is the documentation that explains what my smart contracts do

• Here are the tests I ran to verify my smart contract

• Here are the audit(s) performed on my code by third party experts

Disclaimer

This report is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice of any kind, nor does it constitute an offer to provide investment advisory or other services. Nothing in this report shall be considered a solicitation or offer to buy or sell any security, future, option or other financial instrument or to offer or provide any investment advice or service to any person in any jurisdiction. Nothing contained in this report constitutes investment advice or offers any opinion with respect to the suitability of any security, and the views expressed in this report should not be taken as advice to buy, sell or hold any security. The information in this report should not be relied upon for the purpose of investing. In preparing the information contained in this report, we have not taken into account the investment needs, objectives and financial circumstances of any particular investor. This information has no regard to the specific investment objectives, financial situation and particular needs of any specific recipient of this information and investments discussed may not be suitable for all investors.

Any views expressed in this report by us were prepared based upon the information available to us at the time such views were written. Changed or additional information could cause such views to change. All information is subject to possible correction. Information may quickly become unreliable for various reasons, including changes in market conditions or economic circumstances.

This completed report is copyright (c) DeFiSafety 2021. Permission is given to copy in whole, retaining this copyright label.

Code and Team

This section looks at the code deployed on the Mainnet that gets reviewed and its corresponding software repository. The document explaining these questions is here. This review will answer the questions;

1. Are the executing code addresses readily available? (Y/N)

2. Is the code actively being used? (%)

3. Is there a public software repository? (Y/N)

4. Is there a development history visible? (%)

5. Is the team public (not anonymous)? (Y/N)

Are the executing code addresses readily available? (Y/N)

They are available at website https://docs.tokensets.com/protocol/untitled as indicated in the Appendix. ​

Is the code actively being used? (%)

Activity is 14 transactions a day on contract BasicIssuanceModel.sol, as indicated in the Appendix.

Percentage Score Guidance

100% More than 10 transactions a day 70% More than 10 transactions a week 40% More than 10 transactions a month 10% Less than 10 transactions a month 0% No activity

Is there a public software repository? (Y/N)

The public repo is : https://github.com/SetProtocol/set-v2/tree/master/contracts/protocol​

Is there a public software repository with the code at a minimum, but normally test and scripts also (Y/N). Even if the repo was created just to hold the files and has just 1 transaction, it gets a Yes. For teams with private repos, this answer is No.

How to improve this score

Maintain a public repo, at least for deployed code. Public repo's are in line with the vision of Ethereum where development is shared and public.

Is there a development history visible? (%)

Set protocol has a well-developed github with 800+ commits and 10 branches.

Location: https://github.com/SetProtocol​

This checks if the software repository demonstrates a strong steady history. This is normally demonstrated by commits, branches and releases in a software repository. A healthy history demonstrates a history of more than a month (at a minimum).

Guidance: 100% Any one of 100+ commits, 10+branches 70% Any one of 70+ commits, 7+branches 50% Any one of 50+ commits, 5+branches 30% Any one of 30+ commits, 3+branches 0% Less than 2 branches or less than 10 commits

How to improve this score

Continue to test and perform other verification activities after deployment, including routine maintenance updating to new releases of testing and deployment tools. A public development history indicates clearly to the public the level of continued investment and activity by the developers on the application. This gives a level of security and faith in the application.

Is the team public (not anonymous)? (Y/N)

The team can be viewed at: https://www.tokensets.com/about​

Documentation

This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.

Required questions are;

1. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)

2. Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)

3. Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)

4. Are there sufficiently detailed comments for all functions within the deployed contract code (%)

5. Is it possible to trace from software documentation to the implementation in codee (%)

Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)

Location: https://docs.tokensets.com/protocol/litepaper​

How to improve this score

Ensure the white paper is available for download from your website or at least the software repository. Ideally update the whitepaper to meet the capabilities of your present application.

Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)

Location: https://docs.tokensets.com/api/set-token​

How to improve this score

Write the document based on the deployed code. For guidance, refer to the SecurEth System Description Document.

Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)

Many functions are defined in the litepaper and their operation, but it is not directly corelated to the deployed code. Then there is an API section (https://docs.tokensets.com/api/set-token) which details the IO for major public functions. Together they give a good bit of documentation. This resulted in a 65% score.

Guidance:

100% All contracts and functions documented 80% Only the major functions documented 79-1% Estimate of the level of software documentation 0% No software documentation

How to improve this score

This score can improve by adding content to the requirements document such that it comprehensively covers the requirements. For guidance, refer to the SecurEth System Description Document . Using tools that aid traceability detection will help.

Are there sufficiently detailed comments for all functions within the deployed contract code (%)

There are useful comments present in the code, explaining the execution of the code.

Code examples are in the Appendix. As per the SLOC, there is 40% commenting to code (CtC).

The Comments to Code (CtC) ratio is the primary metric for this score.

Guidance: 100% CtC > 100 Useful comments consistently on all code 90-70% CtC > 70 Useful comment on most code 60-20% CtC > 20 Some useful commenting 0% CtC < 20 No useful commenting

How to improve this score

This score can improve by adding comments to the deployed code such that it comprehensively covers the code. For guidance, refer to the SecurEth Software Requirements.

Is it possible to trace from software documentation to the implementation in code (%)

In the API there is clear tracability between the software and the code, although only a limited number of the functions are documented.

Guidance: 100% - Clear explicit traceability between code and documentation at a requirement level for all code 60% - Clear association between code and documents via non explicit traceability 40% - Documentation lists all the functions and describes their functions 0% - No connection between documentation and code

How to improve this score

This score can improve by adding traceability from requirements to code such that it is clear where each requirement is coded. For reference, check the SecurEth guidelines on traceability.

Testing

This section looks at the software testing available. It is explained in this document. This section answers the following questions;

1. Full test suite (Covers all the deployed code) (%)

2. Code coverage (Covers all the deployed lines of code, or explains misses) (%)

3. Scripts and instructions to run the tests (Y/N)

4. Packaged with the deployed code (Y/N)

5. Report of the results (%)

6. Formal Verification test done (%)

7. Stress Testing environment (%)

Is there a Full test suite? (%)

The TtC ratio is 415%, indicating a highly through set of tests.

This score is guided by the Test to Code ratio (TtC). Generally a good test to code ratio is over 100%. However the reviewers best judgement is the final deciding factor.

Guidance: 100% TtC > 120% Both unit and system test visible 80% TtC > 80% Both unit and system test visible 40% TtC < 80% Some tests visible 0% No tests obvious

How to improve this score

This score can improve by adding tests to fully cover the code. Document what is covered by traceability or test results in the software repository.

Code coverage (Covers all the deployed lines of code, or explains misses) (%)

Because there is no public repository, we can't see any tests, and there are no separate test documentaton or reports.

Guidance: 100% - Documented full coverage 99-51% - Value of test coverage from documented results 50% - No indication of code coverage but clearly there is a reasonably complete set of tests 30% - Some tests evident but not complete 0% - No test for coverage seen

How to improve this score

This score can improve by adding tests achieving full code coverage. A clear report and scripts in the software repository will guarantee a high score.

Scripts and instructions to run the tests (Y/N)

In their github, there is documentation indicating how to run the tests.

Location: https://github.com/SetProtocol/set-v2​

How to improve this score

Add the scripts to the repository and ensure they work. Ask an outsider to create the environment and run the tests. Improve the scripts and docs based on their feedback.

Packaged with the deployed code (Y/N)

The tests are packaged with the deployed code.

How to improve this score

Improving this score requires redeployment of the code, with the tests. This score gives credit to those who test their code before deployment and release them together. If a developer adds tests after deployment they can gain full points for all test elements except this one.

Report of the results (%)

There is no evident report of the results.

How to improve this score

Add a report with the results. The test scripts should generate the report or elements of it.

Formal Verification test done (%)

There is no evident Formal Verification testing having been done.

Stress Testing environment (%)

There is clear stress testing done on the Kovan network.

Audits

There are two audits that have been preformed by OpenZeppelin, and ABDK. There is no public report available for the ABDK audit.

​

Guidance:

1. Multiple Audits performed before deployment and results public and implemented or not required (100%)

2. Single audit performed before deployment and results public and implemented or not required (90%)

3. Audit(s) performed after deployment and no changes required. Audit report is public. (70%)

4. No audit performed (20%)

5. Audit Performed after deployment, existence is public, report is not public and no improvements deployed OR smart contract address' not found, question 1 (0%)

Appendices

Author Details

The author of this review is Rex of Caliburn Consulting.

Email : rex@defisafety.com Twitter : @defisafety

I started with Ethereum just before the DAO and that was a wonderful education. It showed the importance of code quality. The second Parity hack also showed the importance of good process. Here my aviation background offers some value. Aerospace knows how to make reliable code using quality processes.

I was coaxed to go to EthDenver 2018 and there I started SecuEth.org with Bryant and Roman. We created guidelines on good processes for blockchain code development. We got EthFoundation funding to assist in their development.

Process Quality Reviews are an extension of the SecurEth guidelines that will further increase the quality processes in Solidity and Vyper development.

Career wise I am a business development manager for an avionics supplier.

Scoring Appendix

Executing Code Appendix

Code Used Appendix

Example Code Appendix

​
contract BasicIssuanceModule is ModuleBase, ReentrancyGuard {
    using Invoke for ISetToken;
    using Position for ISetToken.Position;
    using Position for ISetToken;
    using PreciseUnitMath for uint256;
    using SafeMath for uint256;
    using SafeCast for int256;
​
    /* ============ Events ============ */
​
    event SetTokenIssued(
        address indexed _setToken,
        address indexed _issuer,
        address indexed _to,
        address _hookContract,
        uint256 _quantity
    );
    event SetTokenRedeemed(
        address indexed _setToken,
        address indexed _redeemer,
        address indexed _to,
        uint256 _quantity
    );
​
    /* ============ State Variables ============ */
​
    // Mapping of SetToken to Issuance hook configurations
    mapping(ISetToken => IManagerIssuanceHook) public managerIssuanceHook;
​
    /* ============ Constructor ============ */
​
    /**
     * Set state controller state variable
     *
     * @param _controller             Address of controller contract
     */
    constructor(IController _controller) public ModuleBase(_controller) {}
​
    /* ============ External Functions ============ */
​
    /**
     * Deposits the SetToken's position components into the SetToken and mints the SetToken of the given quantity
     * to the specified _to address. This function only handles Default Positions (positionState = 0).
     *
     * @param _setToken             Instance of the SetToken contract
     * @param _quantity             Quantity of the SetToken to mint
     * @param _to                   Address to mint SetToken to
     */
    function issue(
        ISetToken _setToken,
        uint256 _quantity,
        address _to
    )
        external
        nonReentrant
        onlyValidAndInitializedSet(_setToken)
    {
        require(_quantity > 0, "Issue quantity must be > 0");
​
        address hookContract = _callPreIssueHooks(_setToken, _quantity, msg.sender, _to);
​
        (
            address[] memory components,
            uint256[] memory componentQuantities
        ) = getRequiredComponentUnitsForIssue(_setToken, _quantity);
​
        // For each position, transfer the required underlying to the SetToken
        for (uint256 i = 0; i < components.length; i++) {
            // Transfer the component to the SetToken
            transferFrom(
                IERC20(components[i]),
                msg.sender,
                address(_setToken),
                componentQuantities[i]
            );
        }
​
        // Mint the SetToken
        _setToken.mint(_to, _quantity);
​
        emit SetTokenIssued(address(_setToken), msg.sender, _to, hookContract, _quantity);
    }
​
    /**
     * Redeems the SetToken's positions and sends the components of the given
     * quantity to the caller. This function only handles Default Positions (positionState = 0).
     *
     * @param _setToken             Instance of the SetToken contract
     * @param _quantity             Quantity of the SetToken to redeem
     * @param _to                   Address to send component assets to
     */
    function redeem(
        ISetToken _setToken,
        uint256 _quantity,
        address _to
    )
        external
        nonReentrant
        onlyValidAndInitializedSet(_setToken)
    {
        require(_quantity > 0, "Redeem quantity must be > 0");
​
        // Burn the SetToken - ERC20's internal burn already checks that the user has enough balance
        _setToken.burn(msg.sender, _quantity);
​
        // For each position, invoke the SetToken to transfer the tokens to the user
        address[] memory components = _setToken.getComponents();
        for (uint256 i = 0; i < components.length; i++) {
            address component = components[i];
            require(!_setToken.hasExternalPosition(component), "Only default positions are supported");
​
            uint256 unit = _setToken.getDefaultPositionRealUnit(component).toUint256();
​
            // Use preciseMul to round down to ensure overcollateration when small redeem quantities are provided
            uint256 componentQuantity = _quantity.preciseMul(unit);
​
            // Instruct the SetToken to transfer the component to the user
            _setToken.strictInvokeTransfer(
                component,
                _to,
                componentQuantity
            );
        }
​
        emit SetTokenRedeemed(address(_setToken), msg.sender, _to, _quantity);
    }
​
    /**
     * Initializes this module to the SetToken with issuance-related hooks. Only callable by the SetToken's manager.
     * Hook addresses are optional. Address(0) means that no hook will be called
     *
     * @param _setToken             Instance of the SetToken to issue
     * @param _preIssueHook         Instance of the Manager Contract with the Pre-Issuance Hook function
     */
    function initialize(
        ISetToken _setToken,
        IManagerIssuanceHook _preIssueHook
    )
        external
        onlySetManager(_setToken, msg.sender)
        onlyValidAndPendingSet(_setToken)
    {
        managerIssuanceHook[_setToken] = _preIssueHook;
​
        _setToken.initializeModule();
    }
​
    /**
     * Reverts as this module should not be removable after added. Users should always
     * have a way to redeem their Sets
     */
    function removeModule() external override {
        revert("The BasicIssuanceModule module cannot be removed");
    }
​
    /* ============ External Getter Functions ============ */
​
    /**
     * Retrieves the addresses and units required to mint a particular quantity of SetToken.
     *
     * @param _setToken             Instance of the SetToken to issue
     * @param _quantity             Quantity of SetToken to issue
     * @return address[]            List of component addresses
     * @return uint256[]            List of component units required to issue the quantity of SetTokens
     */
    function getRequiredComponentUnitsForIssue(
        ISetToken _setToken,
        uint256 _quantity
    )
        public
        view
        onlyValidAndInitializedSet(_setToken)
        returns (address[] memory, uint256[] memory)
    {
        address[] memory components = _setToken.getComponents();
​
        uint256[] memory notionalUnits = new uint256[](components.length);
​
        for (uint256 i = 0; i < components.length; i++) {
            require(!_setToken.hasExternalPosition(components[i]), "Only default positions are supported");
​
            notionalUnits[i] = _setToken.getDefaultPositionRealUnit(components[i]).toUint256().preciseMulCeil(_quantity);
        }
​
        return (components, notionalUnits);
    }
​
    /* ============ Internal Functions ============ */
​
    /**
     * If a pre-issue hook has been configured, call the external-protocol contract. Pre-issue hook logic
     * can contain arbitrary logic including validations, external function calls, etc.
     */
    function _callPreIssueHooks(
        ISetToken _setToken,
        uint256 _quantity,
        address _caller,
        address _to
    )
        internal
        returns(address)
    {
        IManagerIssuanceHook preIssueHook = managerIssuanceHook[_setToken];
        if (address(preIssueHook) != address(0)) {
            preIssueHook.invokePreIssueHook(_setToken, _quantity, _caller, _to);
            return address(preIssueHook);
        }
​
        return address(0);
    }
}
​

SLOC Appendix

Solidity Contracts

Comments to Code 1193/2986 = 40%

Javascript Tests

Tests to Code 12409/2986 = 415%