If you notice some outdated information please let us know!
Process Quality Review (0.9)
Liquity
PASS
Scoring Appendix
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 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 contract on the blockchain(s)
- Here is the documentation that explains what my smart contracts do
- Here are the tests I ran to verify my smart contracts
- Here are all the security steps I took to safeguard these contracts
- Here is an explanation of the control I have to change these smart contracts
- Here is how these smart contracts get information from outside the blockchain (if applicable)
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.
Code and Team
100%
This section looks at the code deployed on the relevant chains and team aspects. The document explaining these questions is here.
1. Are the smart contract addresses easy to find? (%)
Addresses are listed clearly in the Technical Resources section of the documentation7†source
2. Does the protocol have a public software repository? (Y/N)
Public GitHub repository contains the contracts, SDK, and Dev UI frontend
3. Is the team public (not anonymous)?
Team members and advisors are publicly listed on the official website with roles and backgrounds
4. How responsive are the devs when we present our initial report?
Devs answered within a day.
Code Documentation
92%
This section looks at the software documentation. The document explaining these questions is here.
5. Is there a whitepaper? (Y/N)
Location: https://docsend.com/view/bwiczm
6. Is the protocol's software architecture documented? (%)
This protocol's software architecture is documented in full.
7. Does the software documentation fully cover the deployed contracts' source code? (%)
There is full coverage of deployed contracts by software function documentation.
8. Is it possible to trace the documented software to its implementation in the protocol's source code? (%)
Clear association between software documentation and implemented code.
9. Is the documentation organized to ensure information availability and clarity? (%)
Information is well organized, compartmentalized and easy to navigate
Testing
91%
10. Has the protocol tested their deployed code? (%)
Test to Code is 360%, so score 100% TtC = 44716 / 12400 = 360% ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Language Files Lines Blanks Comments Code Complexity ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── JavaScript 83 12400 2410 2366 7624 551 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Total 83 12400 2410 2366 7624 551 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Estimated Cost to Develop $227,975 Estimated Schedule Effort 7.841719 months Estimated People Required 2.582807 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Processed 477432 bytes, 0.477 megabytes (SI) ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Language Files Lines Blanks Comments Code Complexity ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── JavaScript 35 37824 8687 6175 22962 405 Plain Text 16 1319 12 0 1307 0 TypeScript 7 1958 411 88 1459 57 Python 4 2305 44 76 2185 8 Markdown 1 1233 47 0 1186 0 YAML 1 77 17 0 60 0 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Total 64 44716 9218 6339 29159 470 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Estimated Cost to Develop $932,409 Estimated Schedule Effort 13.392590 months Estimated People Required 6.185260 ─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Processed 2206337 bytes, 2.206 megabytes (SI) ───────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
11. How covered is the protocol's code? (%)
Liquity has active code Coverage: https://app.codecov.io/gh/liquity/dev/tree/add_codecov
12. Is there a detailed report of the protocol's test results?(%)
A full report is detailed
13. Has the protocol undergone Formal Verification? (Y/N)
This protocol has not undergone formal verification.
Security
97%
This section looks at the 3rd party software audits done. It is explained in this document.
14. Is the protocol sufficiently audited? (%)
Liquity was audited multiple times before launch.
15. Is there a matrix of audit applicability on deployed code (%)? Please refer to the example doc for reference.
A matrix of audit applicability has been found here: https://docs.liquity.org/documentation/resources#matrix-of-audit-applicability
16. Is the bug bounty value acceptably high (%)
This protocol offers an active bug bounty of $250K
17. Is there documented protocol monitoring (%)?
Liquity uses Forta for monitoring. More information can be found here: https://docs.liquity.org/documentation/bug-bounty/monitoring
18. Is there documented protocol front-end monitoring (%)?
Liquity out sources front end development. They do not run their own front end. We will give them 100% on this question.
Admin Controls
100%
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. Is the protocol code immutable or upgradeable? (%)
The smart contracts are explicitly labeled as immutable in the documentation, indicating no upgradeability.
20. Is the protocol's code upgradeability clearly explained in non technical terms? (%)
Code is Immutable and clearly indicated so in documentation.
21. Are the admin addresses, roles and capabilities clearly explained? (%)
As Liquity cannot be updated or modified, no admin addresses are required, 100%.
22. Are the signers of the admin addresses clearly listed and provably distinct humans? (%)
As Liquity cannot be updated or modified, no admin addresses signers are required, 100%.
23. Is there a robust documented transaction signing policy? Please refer to the Example doc for reference.(%)
As there is no need for transaction signing on this immutable protocol, this is automatically 100%.
Oracles
100%
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.
24. Are Oracles relevant? (Y/N)
25. Is the protocol's Oracle sufficiently documented? (%)
The protocol's oracle source is sufficiently documented at this location. The contracts dependent are identified. There is relevant software function documentation.
26. Can flashloan attacks be applied to the protocol, and if so, are those flashloan attack risks mitigated? (Y/N)
This protocol documents flashloan countermeasures at this location. It incentivizes potential exploiters to focus on flashloan attacks in their bug bounty offering.