P
P
PQ Reviews
Search…
0.7
Multichain Process Quality Review

Overview

This is an Multichain Process Quality Review completed on the 4th of December, 2021. It was performed using the Process Review process (version 0.7.3) and is documented here. The review was performed by Nick of DeFiSafety. Check out our Telegram.
The final score of the review is 54%, a FAIL. The breakdown of the scoring is in Scoring Appendix. For our purposes, a pass is 70%.

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
  • Here are the admin controls and strategies

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, token, 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. The views expressed within this report are limited to DeFiSafety and the author and do not reflect those of any additional or third party and are strictly based upon DeFiSafety, its authors, interpretations and evaluation of relevant data. 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.

Chain

This section indicates the blockchains used by this protocol. This report covers all of the blockchains upon which the protocol is deployed.
Chain: Ethereum, Binance Smart Chain, Fantom, Polygon, HECO, Avalanche + many, many more
Guidance: Ethereum Binance Smart Chain Polygon Avalanche Terra Celo Arbitrum Solana

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 following questions:
1) Are the executing code addresses readily available? (%) 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)

1) Are the executing code addresses readily available? (%)

Answer: 20%
Only token-related smart contracts could be found in the documents, though through Etherscan search bridge contracts were located.
Guidance: 100% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo, quick to find 70% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo but takes a bit of looking 40% Addresses in mainnet.json, in discord or sub graph, etc 20% Address found but labeling not clear or easy to find 0% Executing addresses could not be found

How to improve this score:

Make the Ethereum addresses of the smart contract utilized by your application available on either your website or your GitHub (in the README for instance). Ensure the addresses is up to date. This is a very important question towards the final score.

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

Answer: 100%
Contract BSC-Bridge has more than 100 transactions per day.

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

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

Answer: Yes
Is there a public software repository with the code at a minimum, but also normally test and scripts. Even if the repository was created just to hold the files and has just 1 transaction, it gets a "Yes". For teams with private repositories, this answer is "No".

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

Answer: 100%
At over 800 commits on the main repository, it's clear Multichain takes procedural development history seriously.
This metric 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 30 commits

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

Answer: Yes
For a "Yes" in this question, the real names of some team members must be public on the website or other documentation (LinkedIn, etc). If the team is anonymous, then this question is a "No".

Documentation

This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
Required questions are;
6) Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N) 7) Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N) 8) Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%) 9) Are there sufficiently detailed comments for all functions within the deployed contract code (%) 10) Is it possible to trace from software documentation to the implementation in code (%)

6) Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)

Answer: Yes

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

Answer: Yes
Some software functions are documented.

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

Answer: 40%
While an example of a major function is covered, it is far from exhaustive. In addition, since we do not know what contracts have been deployed we cannot accurately identify documentation coverage.
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 be improved by adding content to the software functions 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.

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

Answer: 26%
Code examples are in the Appendix. As per the SLOC, there is 26% 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.

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

Answer: 20%
Only very few functions are listed and described at https://docs.multichain.org/developer-guide/how-to-integrate-front-end-bridges.
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 documentation to code such that it is clear where each outlined function is coded in the source code. 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;
11) Full test suite (Covers all the deployed code) (%) 12) Code coverage (Covers all the deployed lines of code, or explains misses) (%) 13) Scripts and instructions to run the tests (Y/N) 14) Report of the results (%) 15) Formal Verification test done (%) 16) Stress Testing environment (%)

11) Is there a Full test suite? (%)

Answer: 0%
No evidence of testing was found. Although they do have a testing folder in their main repo, it is empty.
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 improved by adding tests to fully cover the code. Document what is covered by traceability or test results in the software repository.

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

Answer: 0%
No code coverage report or evidence of testing was documented.
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 improved by adding tests that achieve full code coverage. A clear report and scripts in the software repository will guarantee a high score.

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

Answer: 0%
Test scripts were not found. The GitHub contains detailed information on how utilise Multichain's bridge, but doesn't provide scripts with instructions on use.

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.

14) Report of the results (%)

Answer: 0%
No report was found.
Guidance: 100% Detailed test report as described below 70% GitHub code coverage report visible 0% No test report evident

How to improve this score

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

15) Formal Verification test done (%)

Answer: 0%
No evidence of formal verification was found.

16) Stress Testing environment (%)

Answer: 100%
Some testnet usage is documented, specifically for bridging NFTs.

Security

This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document. This section answers the following questions;
17) Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%) 18) Is the bounty value acceptably high?

17) Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%)

Answer: 100%
The code has been audited multiple times, with one audit releasing on the same day as deployment and the following two were released 2 months and a year later respectively.
Guidance: 100% Multiple Audits performed before deployment and results public and implemented or not required 90% Single audit performed before deployment and results public and implemented or not required 70% Audit(s) performed after deployment and no changes required. Audit report is public
50% Audit(s) performed after deployment and changes needed but not implemented 20% No audit performed 0% Audit Performed after deployment, existence is public, report is not public and no improvements deployed OR smart contract address' not found, (where question 1 is 0%)
Deduct 25% if code is in a private repo and no note from auditors that audit is applicable to deployed code

18) Is the bounty value acceptably high (%)

Answer: 80%
AnySwap's documentation offers $1M as an inactive bug bounty.
Guidance:
100% Bounty is 10% TVL or at least $1M AND active program (see below) 90% Bounty is 5% TVL or at least 500k AND active program 80% Bounty is 5% TVL or at least 500k 70% Bounty is 100k or over AND active program 60% Bounty is 100k or over 50% Bounty is 50k or over AND active program 40% Bounty is 50k or over 20% Bug bounty program bounty is less than 50k 0% No bug bounty program offered
An active program means that a third party (such as Immunefi) is actively driving hackers to the site. An inactive program would be static mentions on the docs.

Access Controls

This section covers the documentation of special access controls for a DeFi protocol. The admin access controls are the contracts that allow updating contracts or coefficients in the protocol. Since these contracts can allow the protocol admins to "change the rules", complete disclosure of capabilities is vital for user's transparency. It is explained in this document. The questions this section asks are as follow;
19) Can a user clearly and quickly find the status of the admin controls? 20) Is the information clear and complete? 21) Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments? 22) Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests?

19) Can a user clearly and quickly find the status of the access controls (%)

Answer: 0%
No Admin Control information could was found.
Guidance: 100% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo, quick to find 70% Clearly labelled and on website, docs or repo but takes a bit of looking 40% Access control docs in multiple places and not well labelled 20% Access control docs in multiple places and not labelled 0% Admin Control information could not be found

20) Is the information clear and complete (%)

Answer: 0%
Admin Control information could not be found
Guidance: All the contracts are immutable -- 100% OR
a) All contracts are clearly labelled as upgradeable (or not) -- 30% AND b) The type of ownership is clearly indicated (OnlyOwner / MultiSig / Defined Roles) -- 30% AND c) The capabilities for change in the contracts are described -- 30%

How to improve this score:

Create a document that covers the items described above. An example is enclosed.

21) Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments (%)

Answer: 0%
Admin Control information could not be found
Guidance: 100% All the contracts are immutable 90% Description relates to investments safety and updates in clear, complete non-software l language 30% Description all in software specific language 0% No admin control information could not be found

How to improve this score:

Create a document that covers the items described above in plain language that investors can understand. An example is enclosed.

22) Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests (%)

Answer: 0%
Pause control not documented or explained
Guidance: 100% All the contracts are immutable or no pause control needed and this is explained OR 100% Pause control(s) are clearly documented and there is records of at least one test within 3 months 80% Pause control(s) explained clearly but no evidence of regular tests 40% Pause controls mentioned with no detail on capability or tests 0% Pause control not documented or explained

How to improve this score:

Create a document that covers the items described above in plain language that investors can understand. An example is enclosed.

Appendices

Author Details

The author of this review is Rex of DeFi Safety.
Email : [email protected] 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.
DeFiSafety is my full time gig and we are working on funding vehicles for a permanent staff.

Scoring Appendix

Executing Code Appendix

Code Used Appendix

Example Code Appendix

1
import {isAddress} from 'multichain-bridge'
2
import { useTranslation } from 'react-i18next'
3
import { ThemeContext } from 'styled-components'
4
import { ArrowDown, Plus, Minus } from 'react-feather'
5
6
import SelectChainIdInputPanel from './selectChainID'
7
import Reminder from './reminder'
8
9
import { useActiveWeb3React } from '../../hooks'
10
import {useTerraCrossBridgeCallback} from '../../hooks/useBridgeCallback'
11
import { WrapType } from '../../hooks/useWrapCallback'
12
// import { useApproveCallback, ApprovalState } from '../../hooks/useApproveCallback'
13
// import { useLocalToken } from '../../hooks/Tokens'
14
15
import SelectCurrencyInputPanel from '../CurrencySelect/selectCurrency'
16
import { AutoColumn } from '../Column'
17
// import { ButtonLight, ButtonPrimary, ButtonConfirmed } from '../Button'
18
import { ButtonLight, ButtonPrimary } from '../Button'
19
import { AutoRow } from '../Row'
20
// import Loader from '../Loader'
21
import AddressInputPanel from '../AddressInputPanel'
22
import { ArrowWrapper, BottomGrouping } from '../swap/styleds'
23
import ModalContent from '../Modal/ModalContent'
24
25
import { useWalletModalToggle } from '../../state/application/hooks'
26
// import { tryParseAmount } from '../../state/swap/hooks'
27
// import { useMergeBridgeTokenList } from '../../state/lists/hooks'
28
import { useAllMergeBridgeTokenList } from '../../state/lists/hooks'
29
import { useUserSelectChainId } from '../../state/user/hooks'
30
31
import config from '../../config'
32
import {getParams} from '../../config/tools/getUrlParams'
33
import {selectNetwork} from '../../config/tools/methods'
34
35
// import {getNodeTotalsupply} from '../../utils/bridge/getBalanceV2'
36
// import {formatDecimal, thousandBit} from '../../utils/tools/tools'
37
38
import TokenLogo from '../TokenLogo'
39
// import LiquidityPool from '../LiquidityPool'
40
41
import {
42
LogoBox,
43
ConfirmContent,
44
TxnsInfoText,
45
ConfirmText,
46
FlexEC,
47
} from '../../pages/styled'
48
49
import {
50
outputValue,
51
useInitSelectCurrency,
52
useDestChainid,
53
useDestCurrency
54
} from './hooks'
55
56
// let intervalFN:any = ''
57
58
export default function CrossChain({
59
bridgeKey
60
}: {
61
bridgeKey: any
62
}) {
63
// const { account, chainId, library } = useActiveWeb3React()
64
const { account, chainId } = useActiveWeb3React()
65
const { t } = useTranslation()
66
const [selectNetworkInfo] = useUserSelectChainId()
67
68
const useChainId = useMemo(() => {
69
if (selectNetworkInfo?.chainId) {
70
return selectNetworkInfo?.chainId
71
}
72
return chainId
73
}, [selectNetworkInfo, chainId])
74
75
// const allTokensList:any = useMergeBridgeTokenList(useChainId)
76
const allTokensList:any = useAllMergeBridgeTokenList(bridgeKey, useChainId)
77
const theme = useContext(ThemeContext)
78
const toggleWalletModal = useWalletModalToggle()
79
80
81
const [inputBridgeValue, setInputBridgeValue] = useState('')
82
const [selectCurrency, setSelectCurrency] = useState<any>()
83
const [selectDestCurrency, setSelectDestCurrency] = useState<any>()
84
const [selectDestCurrencyList, setSelectDestCurrencyList] = useState<any>()
85
const [selectChain, setSelectChain] = useState<any>()
86
const [selectChainList, setSelectChainList] = useState<Array<any>>([])
87
const [recipient, setRecipient] = useState<any>(account ?? '')
88
const [swapType, setSwapType] = useState('swap')
89
90
// const [intervalCount, setIntervalCount] = useState<number>(0)
91
92
const [modalOpen, setModalOpen] = useState(false)
93
const [modalTipOpen, setModalTipOpen] = useState(false)
94
95
const [delayAction, setDelayAction] = useState<boolean>(false)
96
97
let initBridgeToken:any = getParams('bridgetoken') ? getParams('bridgetoken') : ''
98
initBridgeToken = initBridgeToken ? initBridgeToken.toLowerCase() : ''
99
100
const destConfig = useMemo(() => {
101
// console.log(selectCurrency)
102
if (selectDestCurrency) {
103
return selectDestCurrency
104
}
105
return false
106
}, [selectDestCurrency])
107
// console.log(destConfig)
108
const isRouter = useMemo(() => {
109
// console.log(destConfig)
110
if (['swapin', 'swapout'].includes(destConfig?.type)) {
111
return false
112
}
113
return true
114
}, [destConfig])
115
116
const isUnderlying = useMemo(() => {
117
if (selectCurrency && selectCurrency?.underlying) {
118
return true
119
}
120
return false
121
}, [selectCurrency])
122
123
const isDestUnderlying = useMemo(() => {
124
// console.log(destConfig)
125
// console.log(destConfig?.underlying)
126
if (destConfig?.underlying) {
127
return true
128
}
129
return false
130
}, [destConfig])
131
132
// const formatCurrency = useLocalToken(selectNetworkInfo?.chainId ? undefined : selectCurrency)
133
134
function onDelay () {
135
setDelayAction(true)
136
}
137
function onClear (type?:any) {
138
setDelayAction(false)
139
setModalTipOpen(false)
140
if (!type) {
141
setInputBridgeValue('')
142
}
143
}
144
145
function changeNetwork (chainID:any) {
146
selectNetwork(chainID).then((res: any) => {
147
console.log(res)
148
if (res.msg === 'Error') {
149
alert(t('changeMetamaskNetwork', {label: config.getCurChainInfo(chainID).networkName}))
150
}
151
})
152
}
153
154
const { balance: terraBalance, wrapType: wrapTerraType, execute: onTerraWrap, inputError: wrapInputErrorTerra } = useTerraCrossBridgeCallback(
155
selectCurrency,
156
destConfig.DepositAddress,
157
inputBridgeValue,
158
selectChain,
159
selectCurrency?.address,
160
destConfig?.pairid,
161
recipient,
162
destConfig?.Unit,
163
useChainId
164
)
165
166
const outputBridgeValue = outputValue(inputBridgeValue, destConfig, selectCurrency)
167
168
const useBalance = useMemo(() => {
169
return terraBalance?.toSignificant(3)
170
}, [terraBalance])
171
// console.log(terraBalance)
172
const isWrapInputError = useMemo(() => {
173
if (wrapInputErrorTerra) {
174
return wrapInputErrorTerra
175
} else {
176
return false
177
}
178
}, [wrapInputErrorTerra])
179
// console.log(selectCurrency)
180
const isCrossBridge = useMemo(() => {
181
const isAddr = isAddress( recipient, selectChain)
182
if (
183
account
184
&& destConfig
185
&& selectCurrency
186
&& inputBridgeValue
187
&& !isWrapInputError
188
&& isAddr
189
) {
190
if (
191
Number(inputBridgeValue) < Number(destConfig.MinimumSwap)
192
|| Number(inputBridgeValue) > Number(destConfig.MaximumSwap)
193
) {
194
return true
195
} else {
196
return false
197
}
198
} else {
199
return true
200
}
201
}, [selectCurrency, account, destConfig, inputBridgeValue, recipient, isWrapInputError, selectChain])
202
203
const isInputError = useMemo(() => {
204
if (
205
account
206
&& destConfig
207
&& selectCurrency
208
&& inputBridgeValue
209
&& isCrossBridge
210
) {
211
if (
212
Number(inputBridgeValue) < Number(destConfig.MinimumSwap)
213
|| Number(inputBridgeValue) > Number(destConfig.MaximumSwap)
214
|| isWrapInputError
215
|| isCrossBridge
216
) {
217
// console.log(1)
218
return true
219
} else {
220
// console.log(2)
221
return false
222
}
223
} else {
224
// console.log(3)
225
return false
226
}
227
}, [account, destConfig, selectCurrency, inputBridgeValue, isCrossBridge, isWrapInputError])
228
229
const btnTxt = useMemo(() => {
230
// console.log(isWrapInputError)
231
if (isWrapInputError && inputBridgeValue) {
232
return isWrapInputError
233
} else if (
234
destConfig
235
&& inputBridgeValue
236
&& (
237
Number(inputBridgeValue) < Number(destConfig.MinimumSwap)
238
|| Number(inputBridgeValue) > Number(destConfig.MaximumSwap)
239
)
240
) {
241
return t('ExceedLimit')
242
} else if (wrapTerraType === WrapType.WRAP) {
243
return t('swap')
244
}
245
return t('swap')
246
}, [t, isWrapInputError, inputBridgeValue, destConfig, isDestUnderlying, wrapTerraType, isRouter])
247
248
const {initCurrency} = useInitSelectCurrency(allTokensList, useChainId, initBridgeToken)
249
250
useEffect(() => {
251
// console.log(initCurrency)
252
setSelectCurrency(initCurrency)
253
}, [initCurrency])
254
255
useEffect(() => {
256
if (swapType == 'swap' && account && !isNaN(selectChain)) {
257
setRecipient(account)
258
} else if (isNaN(selectChain) && destConfig?.type === 'swapout') {
259
setRecipient('')
260
}
261
}, [account, swapType, selectChain, destConfig])
262
263
const {initChainId, initChainList} = useDestChainid(selectCurrency, selectChain, useChainId)
264
265
useEffect(() => {
266
// console.log(selectCurrency)
267
setSelectChain(initChainId)
268
}, [initChainId])
269
270
useEffect(() => {
271
setSelectChainList(initChainList)
272
}, [initChainList])
273
Copied!

SLOC Appendix

Solidity Contracts

Language
Files
Lines
Blanks
Comments
Code
Complexity
Solidity
13
6672
935
1180
4457
510
Comments to Code 1180/4457 = 26%

Javascript Tests

Language
Files
Lines
Blanks
Comments
Code
Complexity
JavaScript
0
0
0
0
0
0
Tests to Code = No evidence of testing was found.
Last modified 10d ago