If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
PASS
The final review score is indicated as a percentage. The percentage is calculated as Achieved Points due to MAX Possible Points. For each element the answer can be either Yes/No or a percentage. For a detailed breakdown of the individual weights of each question, please consult this document.
Very simply, the audit looks for the following declarations from the developer's site. With these declarations, it is reasonable to trust the smart contracts.
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 2023. Permission is given to copy in whole, retaining this copyright label.
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.
1. Are the executing code addresses readily available? (%)
Easily found here.
2. Is the code actively being used? (%)
Activity is 35,755 transactions a day on contract swaprouter.sol, as indicated in the Appendix.
3. Is there a public software repository? (Y/N)
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? (%)
With 933 commits and 1 branch, this is clearly a well-maintained repository.
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).
5. Is the team public (not anonymous)? (Y/N)
The names of the contract engineers can be found on their GitHub.
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".
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
7. Are the basic software functions documented? (Y/N)
8. Does the software function documentation fully (100%) cover the deployed contracts? (%)
All the contracts and the functions are clearly well-documented.
9. Are there sufficiently detailed comments for all functions within the deployed contract code (%)
The Comments to Code (CtC) ratio is the primary metric for this score.
10. Is it possible to trace from software documentation to the implementation in code (%)
there is clear explicit traceability between the code and documentation at all levels of the code.
11. Full test suite (Covers all the deployed code) (%)
With a Test to Code Ratio of 583%, there is clearly a robust test suite.
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.
12. Code coverage (Covers all the deployed lines of code, or explains misses) (%)
There doesn't seem to be any indication of code coverage but obviously with the tests, coverage is considerable.
13. Scripts and instructions to run the tests? (Y/N)
Location: https://github.com/Uniswap/uniswap-v3-core
14. Report of the results (%)
The results of the unit tests, lineter and mythX are available through the github. No coverage report, but they may not have considered coverage necessary.
15. Formal Verification test done (%)
As all testing is based on the spec requirements, this appears to meet the essence of formal verification.
16. Stress Testing environment (%)
This protocol has been stress-tested on all testnets.
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
17. Did 3rd Party audits take place? (%)
ABDK consulting did an audit on the 23rd of march, 2021. Trail of Bits did too.
18. Is the bug bounty acceptable high? (%)
Bug Bounty Location: https://github.com/Uniswap/uniswap-v3-core/blob/main/bug-bounty.md. Max is 500K$
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.
19. Can a user clearly and quickly find the status of the access controls (%)
Location: https://uniswap.org/docs/v2/governance/overview/ and https://uniswap.org/whitepaper-v3.pdf Section 4
20. Is the information clear and complete (%)
21. Is the information in non-technical terms that pertain to the investments (%)
The information is given in clear, non-technical terms that pertain to the investments in the Uniswap whitepaper.
22. Is there Pause Control documentation including records of tests (%)
The whitepaper (Section 4) indicates the owner cannot pause the contracts, so 100%
1// SPDX-License-Identifier: BUSL-1.1
2pragma solidity =0.7.6;
3
4import './interfaces/IUniswapV3Factory.sol';
5
6import './UniswapV3PoolDeployer.sol';
7import './NoDelegateCall.sol';
8
9import './UniswapV3Pool.sol';
10
11/// @title Canonical Uniswap V3 factory
12/// @notice Deploys Uniswap V3 pools and manages ownership and control over pool protocol fees
13contract UniswapV3Factory is IUniswapV3Factory, UniswapV3PoolDeployer, NoDelegateCall {
14 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
15 address public override owner;
16
17 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
18 mapping(uint24 => int24) public override feeAmountTickSpacing;
19 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
20 mapping(address => mapping(address => mapping(uint24 => address))) public override getPool;
21
22 constructor() {
23 owner = msg.sender;
24 emit OwnerChanged(address(0), msg.sender);
25
26 feeAmountTickSpacing[500] = 10;
27 emit FeeAmountEnabled(500, 10);
28 feeAmountTickSpacing[3000] = 60;
29 emit FeeAmountEnabled(3000, 60);
30 feeAmountTickSpacing[10000] = 200;
31 emit FeeAmountEnabled(10000, 200);
32 }
33
34 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
35 function createPool(
36 address tokenA,
37 address tokenB,
38 uint24 fee
39 ) external override noDelegateCall returns (address pool) {
40 require(tokenA != tokenB);
41 (address token0, address token1) = tokenA < tokenB ? (tokenA, tokenB) : (tokenB, tokenA);
42 require(token0 != address(0));
43 int24 tickSpacing = feeAmountTickSpacing[fee];
44 require(tickSpacing != 0);
45 require(getPool[token0][token1][fee] == address(0));
46 pool = deploy(address(this), token0, token1, fee, tickSpacing);
47 getPool[token0][token1][fee] = pool;
48 // populate mapping in the reverse direction, deliberate choice to avoid the cost of comparing addresses
49 getPool[token1][token0][fee] = pool;
50 emit PoolCreated(token0, token1, fee, tickSpacing, pool);
51 }
52
53 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
54 function setOwner(address _owner) external override {
55 require(msg.sender == owner);
56 emit OwnerChanged(owner, _owner);
57 owner = _owner;
58 }
59
60 /// @inheritdoc IUniswapV3Factory
61 function enableFeeAmount(uint24 fee, int24 tickSpacing) public override {
62 require(msg.sender == owner);
63 require(fee < 1000000);
64 // tick spacing is capped at 16384 to prevent the situation where tickSpacing is so large that
65 / TickBitmap#nextInitializedTickWithinOneWord overflows int24 container from a valid tick
66 / 16384 ticks represents a >5x price change with ticks of 1 bips
67 require(tickSpacing > 0 && tickSpacing < 16384);
68 require(feeAmountTickSpacing[fee] == 0);
69
70 feeAmountTickSpacing[fee] = tickSpacing;
71 emit FeeAmountEnabled(fee, tickSpacing);
72 }
73}
Comments to Code: 495 / 1003 = 49 %
Tests to Code: 5856 / 1003 = 584 %