Blockchain Security Audit Scheme
Building a new blockchain that can compete with existing blockchains in today's day and age can be a complex task. A security audit encompasses and thus protects all the layers of blockchain architecture, ensuring it is free of critical security bugs and core functionality issues and is safe for end users.
The security team at ImmuneBytes has developed a tactical blockchain audit scheme to facilitate secure business growth and an ecosystem that can withstand attackers!
Blockchain Mainnet Security Audit
The ImmuneBytes team has experience working on popular blockchains such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, Cardano, Avalanche, and more. We understand the fundamentals of blockchain technology and have built solutions adhering to industry best practices.
A Sybil attack uses a single node to operate many active fake identities within a peer-to-peer network simultaneously. This type of attack aims to undermine the authority or power in a reputable system by gaining the majority of influence in the network.
Eclipse attacks are a special type of cyberattack where an attacker creates an artificial environment around one node or user, which allows the attacker to manipulate the affected node into wrongful action.
An eavesdropping attack is a cyberattack that retrieves user information by intercepting, deleting, or modifying data transmitted between devices, i.e., the data that travels over the network, computer server or Internet of Things (IoT).
Most blockchains have a fixed block size and limit how many transactions fit into a block. Traditional DDoS attacks can be executed against a blockchain to slow its operations, and attackers can work within the blockchain ecosystem to perform a DDoS attack.
BGP Hijack Attack
BGP Hijacking is an attack where attackers intentionally route Internet traffic by falsely acclaiming ownership of groups of IP addresses, called IP prefixes, that they don't own or control.
The alien attack is also known as address pool pollution, where nodes of the same chain are invaded and made to pollute other nodes. As the nodes are on the same chain, the network cannot identify non-similar nodes.
This vulnerability arises in Bitcoin timestamp handling, where an attacker alters the network time counter of the node and forces it to accept an alternative blockchain by creating a poisoned block.
Cryptocurrency Exchange Listing Security Audit
Crypto exchanges are crucial as they deal with billions worth of user funds. Our auditors deploy black-box + gray-box testing mechanisms when it comes to audit DEXs. ImmuneBytes has audited cryptocurrency exchange projects and found the following vulnerability classification common in these projects:
Private Key Prediction
Since cryptography is based on encryption and encryption is always made via an encryption algorithm, nonce generation, etc., it is always a possibility to decrypt it and gain unauthorized access.
A rug pull attack is one where the developers of a crypto project abandon it after accumulating a certain amount of wealth from users and investors.
Insecure Encryption Libraries
Many pre-made libraries exist for incorporating encryption in an application. However, not all libraries are secure and contain improper encryption techniques. Usage of these libraries may result in the exploitation of your project.
Transaction Malleability Attacks
Transaction Malleability attack lets a person change the Bitcoin transaction's unique ID before confirmation on the network. This allows an attacker to pretend as if the transaction never happened.
Transaction Replay Attack
Also known as Double Spend Attacks, this is one of the attacks that blockchain has aimed to solve ever since its inception. The attacker performs a transaction, waits for the merchant to approve it, then reverts it and spends the same currency in another transaction by presenting a conflicting transaction in a different branch.
False Top-up Attack
The hacker initiates a false transfer by constructing a specifically structured transaction, resulting in a real top-up in the exchange.
Many times, programs allow communication through Remote Procedure Calls and perform transactions. A wrongly misconfigured program can, thus, execute poor transactions and result in loss of funds.
Code-based Testing Audit
The ImmuneBytes team deploys the white-box testing methodology for code-based testing audits to ensure maximum code coverage. Various automated tools specific to the smart contract language, along with manual auditing, are deployed in this testing strategy.
Static Source Code Analysis
In a static source code analysis, the code review is done without actually executing the code. It is done based on the analysis of syntax and symbols.
Community Customized Audit plan
Different blockchain frameworks have different vulnerable attributes associated with them. For blockchains like Polkadot and Solana, we have introduced and implemented some audit vectors which are listed below:
Also known as Double Spend Attack, this is one of the attacks that blockchain has aimed to solve ever since its inception. The attacker performs a transaction, waits for the merchant to approve it, then reverts it and spends the same currency in another transaction by presenting a conflicting transaction in a different branch.
Conditional Race Attack
A race attack involves a hacker initializing two conflicting transactions; the first one gets sent to the victim, who accepts the payment without confirmation. The other transaction is broadcasted to the network at that very time, making the first transaction invalid.
Access Control Attack
Access contract attacks, as suggested by the name, occur due to the lack of authentication mechanisms, weak passwords, insufficient authorization and lack of auditing.
Block Data Dependency Attack
These attacks happen because of the dependency on block data, which can often be manipulated by miners. Miners can strategically change a block's timestamp, hash value and other parameters.
Explicit Visibility of Function State Variables
The visibility of functions and state variables should always be labelled explicitly. There should never be a grey area left for attackers to exploit. Functions can be specified as public, private, internal and external.
Arithmetic Precision Error
The result might get truncated in a few arithmetic operations, such as multiplication before division in Solidity, resulting in a precision loss.
Malicious Event Audit
A malicious event should be audited to determine what went wrong. It is imperative that you know the root cause of a hack before mitigating it.
State Consistency Audit
An audit should include checking the smart contract for state consistency, as an improper state in any virtual machine similar to EVM can result in fund loss.
Failed Rollback Audit
If any upgrade is rolled back due to inconsistency or failure, it should be audited to know the reason for failure. That bug should be fixed in the next rollout.
Unit Test Audit
A security audit should include unit test cases written by developers as well as auditors using tools such as Foundry, Truffle, etc., to ensure the proper working of the smart contracts.
Numerical Overflowing Audit
In case of a numerical overflow or underflow, an integer would automatically roll over to a lower or higher value. It should be tested using dynamic analysis tools.
Parameter Verification Audit
In the case of functions in a smart contract, verifying the parameters being passed to them is important. An invalidated input parameter might result in faulty operations.
Error Trapping Audit
Error trapping process is a good control measure as it considers the possibility of events when things are not following a set pattern.
Bounds Check Audit
In auditing, bound checking is detecting whether a variable is within some bounds before it is used. It is important so that no variable acts unpredictably during execution.
Audit weights define the importance of a defect to a customer. Depending on its intended use, a specific bug holds a specific weight for each smart contract.
Macros are used to eliminate the need to repeat the steps of common tasks repeatedly. Reducing redundancy in a code ensures it is optimized and consumes less gas.