If you notice some outdated information please let us know!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 relevant chain that gets reviewed and its corresponding software repository. The document explaining these questions is here.
1. Are the smart contract addresses easy to find? (%)
Jet protocol's smart contract addresses can be found in their protocol documentation. A screenshot of the jet-v2 contracts can be found in the appendix.
2. How active is the primary contract? (%)
Jet protocol's Governance Rewards contract is active with more than 10 transactions a day. A screenshot of the Solscan transaction list is available in the appendix.
3. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
Jet's software repository can be found on their Github.
4. Is there a development history visible? (%)
Jet Protocol's jjet-engine repository has 331 commits and 6 branches, which earns the protocol 100% on this score.
5. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
Jet protocol's team is public and members can be found on their LinkedIn page. A screenshot of the LinkedIn page is provided in the appendix.
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
6. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
7. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (Y/N)
The protocol's Litepaper documents software architecture through written explanations and graphs under DeFi Primitives, Instruments and Markets.
8. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
No software function docs are documented in either their repository or user documentation.
9. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)
There are no software function docs to trace, making it impossible to award points. While we can see program source code in their repository, there is no documentation explaining it.
10. Has the protocol tested their deployed code? (%)
Code examples are in the Appendix at the end of this report.. As per the SLOC, there is 118% testing to code (TtC). This score is guided by the Test to Code ratio (TtC). Generally a good test to code ratio is over 100%. However, the reviewer's best judgement is the final deciding factor.
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
Code coverage testing indicates a result of 88% for their Jet V2 repository.
12. Does the protocol provide scripts and instructions to run their tests? (Y/N)
Scripts/Instructions location: https://github.com/jet-lab/jet-v2#install?
13. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
There is extensive documentation on test results within the repositories' actions tab. Here is the one for the jet-v2 repository and a test run suite.
14. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
This protocol has not undergone formal verification.
15. Were the smart contracts deployed to a testnet? (Y/N)
Testnet contracts can be found on the Smart Contracts page.
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
16. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)
Jet has undergone two audits for their v2 version pre-launch, which gives the protocol full marks. You can consult the Halborn audit and the OtterSec audit.
17. Is the bounty value acceptably high (%)
Jet's bounty is displayed as 100 000$ on Immunefi. Since this is an active bug bounty, the protocol earns a 70% on this score.
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.
18. Is the protocol's admin control information easy to find?
Admin control information can be found in the Smart Contracts page. This was easy to find.
19. Are relevant contracts clearly labelled as upgradeable or immutable? (%)
All contracts are clearly labelled as upgradeable in their documentation, earning the protocol an 80%.
20. Is the type of smart contract ownership clearly indicated? (%)
Onwership is clearly indicated in the smart contract documentation as Multisig.
21. Are the protocol's smart contract change capabilities described? (%)
Jet's smart contract change capabilities are identified in the Smart Contracts Page.
22. Is the protocol's admin control information easy to understand? (%)
Admin control information can be found in the whitepaper and is easy to understand.
23. Is there sufficient Pause Control documentation? (%)
Pause control documentation is also present in the Smart Contracts page. Evidence of testing will be provided in the near future as per the core team.
24. Is there sufficient Timelock documentation? (%)
There is mention of a time-lock within the governance section, but that's about it. Because the source, duration and functions of the timelock are not described, the protocol earns 30%.
25. Is the Timelock of an adequate length? (Y/N)
No timelock duration is highlighted within the documentation.
This section goes over the documentation that a protocol may or may not supply about their Oracle usage. Oracles are a fundamental part of DeFi as they are responsible for relaying tons of price data information to thousands of protocols using blockchain technology. Not only are they important for price feeds, but they are also an essential component of transaction verification and security. These questions are explained in this document.
26. Is the protocol's Oracle sufficiently documented? (%)
There is clear Oracle documentation within Jet's docs, which can be found here. Details of the source, functions and timeframes are all provided, which earns the protocol full marks.
27. Is front running mitigated by this protocol? (Y/N)
There are front running is mitigated through a confidence interval feature as well as liquidation protection features, outlined here.
28. Can flashloan attacks be applied to the protocol, and if so, are those flashloan attack risks mitigated? (Y/N)
Flashloans are not permitted on the protocol, as outlined here.
1
2import { GetProgramAccountsFilter } from "@solana/web3.js"
3import { Program, Provider, ProgramAccount } from "@project-serum/anchor"
4import { Jet } from "./idl"
5import { ObligationAccount } from "./types"
6import { JET_ID } from "."
7import { PositionInfoStructList } from "./layout"
8import { parsePosition } from "./util"
9import { Hooks } from "../common/hooks"
10
11/**
12 * TODO:
13 * @export
14 * @class JetClient
15 */
16export class JetClient {
17 private static OBLIGATION_ACCOUNT_NAME = "Obligation"
18
19 /**
20 * Creates an instance of JetClient.
21 * @param {Program<Jet>} program
22 * @param {boolean} [devnet]
23 * @memberof JetClient
24 */
25 constructor(public program: Program<Jet>, public devnet?: boolean) {}
26
27 /**
28 * Create a new client for interacting with the Jet lending program.
29 * @param {Provider} provider The provider with wallet/network access that can be used to send transactions.
30 * @param {boolean} [devnet] Flag to determine if the connection is for devnet
31 * @returns {Promise<JetClient>} The client
32 * @memberof JetClient
33 */
34 static async connect(provider: Provider, devnet?: boolean): Promise<JetClient> {
35 const idl = await Program.fetchIdl(JET_ID, provider)
36 return new JetClient(new Program<Jet>(idl as Jet, JET_ID, provider), devnet)
37 }
38
39 /**
40 * Return all `Obligation` program accounts that have been created
41 * @param {GetProgramAccountsFilter[]} [filters]
42 * @returns {Promise<ProgramAccount<Obligation>[]>}
43 * @memberof JetClient
44 */
45 async allObligations(filters?: GetProgramAccountsFilter[]): Promise<ProgramAccount<ObligationAccount>[]> {
46 return (this.program.account.obligation as any).all(filters)
47 }
48
49 /**
50 * Decodes a buffer of account data into a usable
51 * `Obligation` object.
52 * @param {Buffer} b
53 * @returns {ObligationAccount}
54 * @memberof JetClient
55 */
56 decodeObligation(b: Buffer): ObligationAccount {
57 const o = this.program.coder.accounts.decode<ObligationAccount>(JetClient.OBLIGATION_ACCOUNT_NAME, b)
58 o.loans = PositionInfoStructList.decode(Buffer.from(o.loans as any as number[])).map(parsePosition)
59 o.collateral = PositionInfoStructList.decode(Buffer.from(o.collateral as any as number[])).map(parsePosition)
60 return o
61 }
62
63 /**
64 * Encodes the argued `Obligation` object into a `Buffer`.
65 * @param {ObligationAccount} o
66 * @returns {Promise<Buffer>}
67 * @memberof JetClient
68 */
69 encodeObligation(o: ObligationAccount): Promise<Buffer> {
70 return this.program.coder.accounts.encode<ObligationAccount>(JetClient.OBLIGATION_ACCOUNT_NAME, o)
71 }
72
73 /**
74 * @static
75 * @param {Provider} provider
76 * @returns {(JetClient | undefined)} JetClient | undefined
77 * @memberof JetClient
78 */
79 static use(provider: Provider, devnet?: boolean): JetClient | undefined {
80 return Hooks.usePromise(async () => provider && JetClient.connect(provider, devnet), [provider])
81 }
82}
Tests to Code: 2901 / 2480 = 117 %