AI Arena - hassanshakeel13's results

AI-Arena

Basic Analysis

Number of Contracts: The AI Arena codebase comprises a total of nine contracts, each serving a specific purpose within the platform's ecosystem. These contracts collectively govern various aspects of the platform, including NFT management, game mechanics, token economics, and external interactions. The modular design of the contracts enables clear separation of concerns and promotes code organization and maintainability.

Lines of Code (SLoC): The codebase consists of a total of 1271 lines of code, indicating a moderate-sized project with a considerable degree of complexity. The extensive codebase reflects the comprehensive set of features and functionalities offered by the platform, catering to diverse user needs and requirements.

External Imports: Within the contracts, five external imports are utilized to incorporate essential libraries and dependencies. Notably, the contracts rely on widely-used libraries such as OpenZeppelin, which provide standardized implementations of fundamental smart contract functionalities. Leveraging external imports enhances code reusability, accelerates development timelines, and ensures adherence to industry best practices.

Interfaces and Structs: The contracts define four distinct struct types, which play a crucial role in organizing and managing data structures within the platform. Structs facilitate the encapsulation of related data fields, promoting code clarity, and readability. Additionally, the presence of interfaces enables seamless interaction between different components of the system, enhancing modularity and extensibility.

Composition vs. Inheritance: Throughout the codebase, a preference for composition over inheritance is evident. This design choice emphasizes the construction of complex objects by composing simpler components, leading to more modular and flexible code. By favoring composition, the codebase achieves greater code reuse, scalability, and maintainability, thereby facilitating easier modifications and updates.

External Calls: The contracts do not involve any external calls, indicating a self-contained architecture that minimizes dependencies on external systems. This design approach enhances security, reliability, and determinism by eliminating potential vulnerabilities associated with external interactions. Moreover, avoiding external calls simplifies the auditing process and ensures the predictability of smart contract execution.

Test Coverage: The test suite exhibits a commendable line coverage of 90%, reflecting rigorous testing efforts aimed at ensuring the correctness and robustness of the platform. High test coverage is critical for identifying and addressing bugs, vulnerabilities, and edge cases effectively. A comprehensive testing suite instills confidence in the reliability and functionality of the platform, contributing to overall system stability and user satisfaction.

Upgrade of Existing System: The audit does not involve an upgrade of an existing system; instead, the focus is on reviewing newly developed contracts. This suggests a proactive approach to platform development, aimed at introducing new features and enhancing existing functionalities to improve user experience and platform performance continually.

Features: The contracts encompass a wide range of features, including ERC-20 token functionality, NFT management, voltage management, and various game-related mechanics. These features collectively contribute to the richness and diversity of the AI Arena platform, offering users an engaging and immersive gaming experience. Each feature is meticulously designed and implemented to enhance user engagement, foster community growth, and drive platform adoption.

Context and Required Understanding: To gain a comprehensive understanding of certain aspects of the codebase, familiarity with the mint pass redemption mechanism and the ranked battle points system is essential. These components play pivotal roles in shaping user interactions and platform dynamics. A deep understanding of these mechanisms enables auditors to assess the fairness, efficiency, and security of the platform effectively.

Oracle Usage: The platform leverages a game server as an oracle to provide reliable and transparent battle results on-chain. This approach ensures fairness and integrity in determining battle outcomes, enhancing user trust and confidence in the platform. By integrating a trusted external data source, the platform mitigates the risk of manipulation or tampering, thereby preserving the integrity of the gaming experience.

Novel Logic: One notable aspect of the codebase is the innovative points system used for distributing ERC-20 tokens at the end of each round. This system incorporates factors such as ELO score, staking factor, and merging pool allocation percentage, representing a novel approach to reward distribution. This innovative design underscores a thoughtful and comprehensive approach to incentivizing desirable behaviors, promoting user engagement, and fostering a vibrant ecosystem within the AI Arena platform.

Admin Abuse Risks

1. Inadequate Access Control Mechanisms:

Problem: The contracts lack granular access control mechanisms, which could lead to unauthorized users executing sensitive functions or modifying critical parameters.

Example: In FighterFarm.sol, the transferOwnership function allows the contract owner to transfer ownership to any address without additional verification. This could be exploited by a malicious actor to take control of the contract.

function transferOwnership(address newOwnerAddress) external {
    require(msg.sender == _ownerAddress);
    _ownerAddress = newOwnerAddress;
}

Solution: Implement role-based access control (RBAC) using OpenZeppelin's AccessControl contract. Define distinct roles such as SuperAdmin and Moderator, each with specific access levels to functions within the contract. Utilize modifiers to restrict access to critical functions based on the caller's role.

2. Owner Privileges Vulnerabilities:

Problem: Granting excessive power to the owner address poses a risk of abuse, as a compromised or malicious owner could perform unauthorized actions such as transferring ownership or modifying contract parameters.

Example: In VoltageManager.sol, the transferOwnership function allows the current owner to transfer ownership to any address without additional authorization. This could be exploited by a compromised owner to seize control of the contract.

function transferOwnership(address newOwnerAddress) external {
    require(msg.sender == _ownerAddress);
    _ownerAddress = newOwnerAddress;
}

Solution: Implement multi-signature authorization for critical operations by requiring approval from multiple authorized administrators before executing owner-specific functions. Utilize a threshold signature scheme or a multi-signature wallet to ensure that sensitive actions require consensus from multiple authorized parties.

3. Admin Access Control Complexity:

Problem: The presence of multiple admin roles with varying levels of access introduces complexity to the access control model, increasing the risk of misconfigurations or oversight.

Example: In AiArenaHelper.sol, the adjustAdminAccess function allows the owner to modify admin access levels without clear delineation of roles and permissions. This could lead to confusion or inconsistencies in admin privileges.

function adjustAdminAccess(address adminAddress, bool access) external {
    require(msg.sender == _ownerAddress);
    isAdmin[adminAddress] = access;
}

Solution: Define clear roles and responsibilities for each admin role, specifying granular permissions and restrictions. Implement event logging to track administrative actions and changes to contract state, providing transparency and accountability. Utilize access control lists (ACLs) to manage admin roles and permissions dynamically.

4. Lack of External Audits and Reviews:

Problem: Without regular external audits and security reviews, potential vulnerabilities and weaknesses in the access control mechanisms may remain undetected, posing risks to the security and integrity of the platform.

Example: The absence of external audits and security reviews leaves the contracts susceptible to undiscovered vulnerabilities and exploits, increasing the likelihood of admin abuse.

Solution: Engage reputable blockchain security firms to conduct comprehensive audits and security reviews of the smart contracts. Implement rigorous testing methodologies, including code analysis, penetration testing, and risk assessment, to identify and remediate any vulnerabilities or weaknesses in the access control mechanisms. Regularly review and update the contracts based on audit findings and recommendations to maintain a robust security posture.

Systematic Risks

1. Smart Contract Vulnerabilities:

   • Problem: Smart contract vulnerabilities pose a significant risk to the security and integrity of the AI Arena platform. One of the most critical vulnerabilities is reentrancy, where an external contract can call back into the vulnerable contract before the first execution is completed, potentially leading to manipulation of contract state and funds.
   • Code Example: The reclaimNRN function in the StakeAtRisk contract is susceptible to reentrancy if external calls are made after state changes. Here's a snippet of the vulnerable code:

     function reclaimNRN(uint256 nrnToReclaim, uint256 fighterId, address fighterOwner) external {
         require(msg.sender == _rankedBattleAddress, "Call must be from RankedBattle contract");
         require(
             stakeAtRisk[roundId][fighterId] >= nrnToReclaim, 
             "Fighter does not have enough stake at risk"
         );
     
         bool success = _neuronInstance.transfer(_rankedBattleAddress, nrnToReclaim);
         if (success) {
             // Vulnerable code: external call made after state changes
             stakeAtRisk[roundId][fighterId] -= nrnToReclaim;
             totalStakeAtRisk[roundId] -= nrnToReclaim;
             amountLost[fighterOwner] -= nrnToReclaim;
             emit ReclaimedStake(fighterId, nrnToReclaim);
         }
     }

   • Improvement Steps: To mitigate reentrancy vulnerabilities, the AI Arena project should adopt the checks-effects-interactions pattern, ensuring that state changes are made before any external calls. Additionally, using secure coding patterns like OpenZeppelin's ReentrancyGuard can provide an added layer of protection. Regular security audits should also be conducted to identify and address any potential vulnerabilities.

2. Dependency Risks:

   • Problem: Dependency risks arise from relying on external libraries and frameworks, such as OpenZeppelin, which are used in the AI Arena project. These dependencies introduce the risk of vulnerabilities or changes in behavior, potentially impacting the security and functionality of the platform.
   • Code Example: The AI Arena project imports several external dependencies, such as the GameItems, Neuron, and FixedPointMathLib contracts, as well as contracts from the OpenZeppelin library. Here's an example snippet:

     import { GameItems } from "./GameItems.sol";
     import { Neuron } from "./Neuron.sol";
     import { FixedPointMathLib } from "./FixedPointMathLib.sol";
     
     // Example of dependency import from external library (OpenZeppelin)
     import { ERC721 } from "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC721/ERC721.sol";

   • Improvement Steps: To mitigate dependency risks, the AI Arena project should implement version pinning for dependencies, ensuring that the project uses specific versions of external libraries that have been thoroughly tested and vetted. Regularly monitoring for updates and security advisories from library maintainers is also crucial, as is considering alternative decentralized package management solutions like IPFS or decentralized package registries.

3. Oracle Dependency Risks:

   • Problem: Dependency on external oracles, such as the game server, introduces risks related to data integrity, manipulation, and availability. If the oracle is compromised or experiences downtime, it can adversely affect the functionality and reliability of the AI Arena platform.
   • Code Example: The AI Arena project likely relies on external oracles, such as the game server, to fetch data like battle results. Here's a hypothetical snippet of code representing such a dependency:

     /// @notice Gets the battle result from the game server oracle
     function getBattleResult(uint256 battleId) external returns (BattleResult memory) {
         // Logic to fetch battle result from game server
     }

   • Improvement Steps: To mitigate oracle dependency risks, the AI Arena project should consider utilizing decentralized oracle solutions such as Chainlink or Band Protocol. These solutions source data from multiple independent providers, reducing the risk of data manipulation or single points of failure. Additionally, implementing cryptographic techniques for data integrity verification, such as digital signatures or hash chains, can enhance the security of data fetched from external oracles. Finally, implementing failover mechanisms to handle oracle failures gracefully, such as fallback or redundant oracle nodes, can help maintain platform functionality during periods of downtime.

Technical Risks

1. Smart Contract Vulnerabilities:

   • Assessment: The contracts are susceptible to various vulnerabilities such as reentrancy, unchecked external calls, and integer overflow/underflow. For instance, the reclaimNRN function in StakeAtRisk.sol lacks proper input validation, making it vulnerable to reentrancy attacks.
   • Risk Example: Consider the following code snippet from StakeAtRisk.sol:

     function reclaimNRN(uint256 nrnToReclaim, uint256 fighterId, address fighterOwner) external {
         require(msg.sender == _rankedBattleAddress, "Call must be from RankedBattle contract");
         require(
             stakeAtRisk[roundId][fighterId] >= nrnToReclaim, 
             "Fighter does not have enough stake at risk"
         );
     
         bool success = _neuronInstance.transfer(_rankedBattleAddress, nrnToReclaim);
         if (success) {
             stakeAtRisk[roundId][fighterId] -= nrnToReclaim;
             totalStakeAtRisk[roundId] -= nrnToReclaim;
             amountLost[fighterOwner] -= nrnToReclaim;
             emit ReclaimedStake(fighterId, nrnToReclaim);
         }
     }

   • Improvement Steps:
     • Implement checks-effects-interactions pattern to prevent reentrancy attacks.
     • Use safe math libraries like OpenZeppelin's SafeMath to prevent integer overflow/underflow.
     • Conduct comprehensive security audits using tools like MythX to identify and mitigate vulnerabilities.

2. Scalability Challenges:

   • Assessment: Reliance on the Ethereum mainnet may lead to scalability issues due to high gas costs and limited transaction throughput. Integration with layer 2 scaling solutions and optimization of smart contracts are necessary to mitigate these challenges.
   • Risk Example: The useVoltageBattery function in VoltageManager.sol consumes significant gas due to the execution of multiple operations within a single transaction, potentially leading to higher costs and slower transaction processing.
   • Improvement Steps:
     • Explore layer 2 scaling solutions such as Optimistic Rollups or zkRollups to improve transaction throughput and reduce costs.
     • Optimize gas consumption by breaking down complex operations into smaller, more efficient transactions.
     • Implement batch processing or asynchronous operations where applicable to reduce transaction overhead.

3. Code Quality and Maintainability:

   • Assessment: The codebase lacks consistent coding standards, comprehensive documentation, and modular design principles, hindering code quality and maintainability. Clearer documentation, adherence to coding standards, and modularization are crucial for long-term sustainability.
   • Risk Example: Inconsistent naming conventions and lack of inline comments make it challenging to understand the purpose and functionality of certain functions and variables across the codebase.
   • Improvement Steps:
     • Enforce standardized naming conventions and code formatting guidelines to improve readability and consistency.
     • Provide comprehensive inline comments and documentation for all functions, variables, and complex logic to enhance code understandability.
     • Refactor monolithic contracts into smaller, modular components with clearly defined responsibilities to facilitate code reuse and maintainability.

Non-Standard Token Risks

1. Custom Functionality Complexity:
   • Assessment: The Neuron (NRN) token contract includes custom functionalities for staking, governance, and rewards distribution, deviating from standard ERC-20 token implementations.
   • Risk: The complexity of custom features may introduce unforeseen vulnerabilities or exploit vectors, potentially compromising the security and integrity of the token contract.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Review the implementation of custom functions such as staking and governance to ensure they adhere to best practices and do not introduce security risks.
     • Conduct thorough code reviews and security audits to identify and address any potential vulnerabilities or attack vectors.
     • Consider modularizing complex functionalities into separate contracts to improve maintainability and reduce the attack surface.

// Example: Custom staking functionality in the Neuron (NRN) token contract
function stake(uint256 amount) external {
    require(amount > 0, "Cannot stake zero tokens");
    // Perform stake operation and update stake-related data
    // Emit event to track staking activity
    emit Staked(msg.sender, amount);
}

2. Lack of Standardization:
   • Assessment: The Neuron (NRN) token may not fully adhere to established ERC standards like ERC-20 or ERC-721, potentially hindering interoperability and compatibility with existing DeFi protocols and platforms.
   • Risk: Non-standard token implementations may face challenges in integrating with decentralized exchanges (DEXs), liquidity pools, and lending platforms, limiting liquidity and market accessibility.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Evaluate the compatibility of the Neuron (NRN) token with existing ERC standards and identify areas where standardization is lacking.
     • Implement missing standard functions and interfaces to align the token contract with widely adopted ERC standards, ensuring compatibility with third-party platforms and protocols.
     • Test token interactions with popular DeFi protocols and platforms to verify interoperability and address any compatibility issues.

// Example: Implementing missing ERC-20 standard functions in the Neuron (NRN) token contract
function approve(address spender, uint256 amount) external returns (bool) {
    // Implement approve function logic
}

function transferFrom(address sender, address recipient, uint256 amount) external returns (bool) {
    // Implement transferFrom function logic
}

function balanceOf(address account) external view returns (uint256) {
    // Implement balanceOf function logic
}

3. Complex Tokenomics:
   • Assessment: The Neuron (NRN) token contract may incorporate intricate tokenomics such as staking mechanisms, governance voting, and reward distributions, introducing additional layers of complexity.
   • Risk: Complex tokenomics may increase the likelihood of bugs, errors, or unintended behavior, potentially undermining the stability and functionality of the token contract.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Simplify tokenomics where possible by reducing the number of features or streamlining existing functionalities.
     • Enhance documentation to provide clear explanations of tokenomics concepts and usage instructions for developers and users.
     • Conduct thorough testing and simulations to validate the behavior of complex tokenomics under various scenarios and edge cases.

// Example: Simplified staking functionality in the Neuron (NRN) token contract
function stake(uint256 amount) external {
    require(amount > 0, "Cannot stake zero tokens");
    // Perform stake operation and update stake-related data
    // Emit event to track staking activity
    emit Staked(msg.sender, amount);
}

4. Smart Contract Upgradability:
   • Assessment: The Neuron (NRN) token contract may lack built-in upgradability mechanisms, making it challenging to introduce improvements or address issues post-deployment.
   • Risk: Without upgradability features, the token contract may become obsolete or vulnerable to exploits over time, necessitating redeployment and migration efforts that could disrupt the ecosystem.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Implement upgradeable smart contract patterns such as Proxy or Eternal Storage to facilitate seamless upgrades and maintenance of the token contract.
     • Establish governance mechanisms and procedures for proposing, approving, and implementing smart contract upgrades in a transparent and decentralized manner.

// Example: Implementing upgradeable smart contract pattern using Proxy
contract NeuronProxy {
    address public implementation;

    function upgradeTo(address newImplementation) external {
        // Perform upgrade to new implementation contract
    }
}

Software engineering considerations

1. Modularity and Code Organization:
   • Assessment: The project's contracts exhibit a degree of modularity, but there's room for improvement in code organization and reuse.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Extract common functionalities into separate libraries or interfaces to promote code reuse and maintainability. For example, utility functions for access control or error handling could be consolidated into a shared library.
     • Refactor contracts to adhere more closely to the Single Responsibility Principle (SRP). Each contract should have a clear and focused purpose, handling only one aspect of the system's functionality.
     • Utilize inheritance and composition judiciously to avoid code redundancy and minimize complexity. Extract common functionalities into parent contracts and inherit them in relevant child contracts.

// Example of inheritance to promote code reuse
contract Ownable {
    address public owner;

    constructor() {
        owner = msg.sender;
    }

    modifier onlyOwner() {
        require(msg.sender == owner, "Ownable: caller is not the owner");
        _;
    }
}

contract MyContract is Ownable {
    uint256 public value;

    function updateValue(uint256 _newValue) public onlyOwner {
        value = _newValue;
    }
}

2. Error Handling and Exception Management:
   • Assessment: While the contracts incorporate basic error handling mechanisms using require statements, there's room to enhance error reporting and exceptional condition handling.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Implement custom error messages or revert reasons to provide more informative feedback to users and developers. This can aid in debugging and troubleshooting.
     • Use enums or error codes to categorize different types of errors and streamline error handling logic. This improves code readability and maintainability.
     • Ensure robust input validation to prevent unexpected behaviors or vulnerabilities stemming from malformed inputs.

// Example of custom error messages and input validation
function buyTokens(uint256 _amount) external payable {
    require(_amount > 0, "Invalid amount");
    require(msg.value == _amount * tokenPrice, "Incorrect payment amount");
    
    // Proceed with token purchase
}

3. Gas Optimization and Efficiency:
   • Assessment: While the contracts may employ some gas-efficient coding practices, further optimization could reduce transaction costs.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Review contract functions and data structures to identify gas-intensive operations or storage patterns that could be optimized. Consider using bitwise operations instead of arithmetic operations where applicable.
     • Utilize gas-efficient algorithms and data structures, such as mapping instead of arrays, to reduce gas consumption. Storage arrays should be used only when necessary, and memory arrays can be used for temporary data.
     • Employ lazy evaluation techniques and batch processing to optimize gas usage during contract execution. Defer state updates until necessary and batch multiple state changes into a single transaction where possible.

// Example of lazy evaluation and batch processing
function batchTransfer(address[] calldata _recipients, uint256[] calldata _amounts) external {
    require(_recipients.length == _amounts.length, "Invalid input lengths");

    for (uint256 i = 0; i < _recipients.length; i++) {
        // Perform batch transfer logic
    }
}

4. Documentation and Code Comments:
   • Assessment: While there may be some level of documentation, improvements could be made to enhance clarity and accessibility.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Provide detailed explanations of contract functionality, data structures, and external dependencies in code comments and documentation files. Document public and external functions with descriptions of inputs, outputs, and modifiers.
     • Use inline comments to clarify complex or critical sections of code and provide insights into implementation decisions. Comment on algorithms, data structures, and edge cases to aid comprehension.
     • Maintain up-to-date README files, developer guides, and API documentation to facilitate usage and collaboration among developers. Include instructions for deployment, testing, and interacting with the contracts.

// Example of inline comments
contract MyContract {
    uint256 public value;

    // Updates the value to a new value
    function updateValue(uint256 _newValue) public {
        // Ensure the new value is not zero
        require(_newValue != 0, "New value cannot be zero");

        // Update the value
        value = _newValue;
    }
}

5. Security Considerations:
   • Assessment: While the contracts may have implemented basic security measures, additional steps could be taken to mitigate potential risks.
   • Actionable Steps:
     • Conduct thorough security audits using automated tools and manual code reviews to identify vulnerabilities and weaknesses. Prioritize issues based on severity and address them promptly.
     • Implement access control mechanisms to restrict privileged operations to authorized users and prevent unauthorized access or manipulation of contract state. Utilize the principle of least privilege to minimize attack surfaces.
     • Stay informed about the latest security best practices and industry standards. Regularly update the contracts to address emerging threats or vulnerabilities and incorporate fixes from security advisories.

// Example of access control mechanism
contract MyContract {
    address public owner;

    constructor() {
        owner = msg.sender;
    }

    // Modifier to restrict access to the owner
    modifier onlyOwner() {
        require(msg.sender == owner, "Only the owner can call this function");
        _;
    }

    // Function accessible only to the owner
    function withdraw() external onlyOwner {
        // Withdraw funds
    }
}

Business Logic

1. AiArenaHelper.sol: This contract is instrumental in generating and managing the physical attributes of AI fighters. It encapsulates the logic for generating attributes such as strength, agility, and intelligence, which contribute to the unique characteristics of each fighter. Here's a simplified representation of how the attributes might be generated:

contract AiArenaHelper {
    function generateFighterAttributes() external returns (uint8 strength, uint8 agility, uint8 intelligence) {
        // Logic for generating attributes
        return (strength, agility, intelligence);
    }
}

2. FighterFarm.sol: As the central hub for fighter management, this contract facilitates the creation, ownership, and redemption of AI fighter NFTs. It implements functionality for minting new NFTs, transferring ownership, and redeeming mint passes. Additionally, it manages the merging pool, where users can potentially earn new fighter NFTs. Here's an outline of the core functionalities:

contract FighterFarm {
    // Core functionalities such as minting, ownership transfer, and merging pool management
}

3. RankedBattle.sol: This contract governs the staking of Neuron (NRN) tokens on fighters and tracks battle records. It calculates rewards based on battle outcomes and staked amounts, providing an incentive for users to participate in battles. The contract also manages stake at risk during battles, adding a risk-reward element to the gameplay. Here's a simplified overview of the battle logic:

contract RankedBattle {
    // Battle logic including staking, tracking records, and reward calculation
}

4. StakeAtRisk.sol: Complementing the functionality of RankedBattle.sol, this contract manages the staking of NRN tokens at risk during battles. It allows users to reclaim their stake if they win a battle while having NRNs at risk. Here's a high-level overview of the stake management logic:

contract StakeAtRisk {
    // Logic for managing stake at risk and reclaiming stakes
}

5. VoltageManager.sol: Responsible for managing the voltage system, this contract facilitates the replenishment of voltage for game items. It allows users to use voltage batteries to replenish voltage, influencing gameplay dynamics. Here's a basic representation of the voltage replenishment process:

contract VoltageManager {
    // Logic for voltage replenishment
}

6. GameItems.sol: This contract represents a collection of in-game items used within AI Arena. It likely contains functionality for creating, transferring, and managing game items. Here's a simplified outline:

contract GameItems {
    // Core functionality for managing in-game items
}

Testing Suite

1. AiArenaHelper.sol:
   • Functionality: Generates and manages AI Arena fighter attributes.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test the generateFighterAttributes function to ensure it generates valid attributes within the specified range.
     • Verify that attributes are within the expected range.
     • Check for gas efficiency during attribute generation.

// AiArenaHelperTest.sol
contract AiArenaHelperTest {
    AiArenaHelper aiArenaHelper;

    constructor(AiArenaHelper _aiArenaHelper) {
        aiArenaHelper = _aiArenaHelper;
    }

    function testGenerateFighterAttributes() public {
        (uint8 strength, uint8 agility, uint8 intelligence) = aiArenaHelper.generateFighterAttributes();
        assert(strength >= 0 && strength <= 100);
        assert(agility >= 0 && agility <= 100);
        assert(intelligence >= 0 && intelligence <= 100);
    }
}

2. FighterFarm.sol:
   • Functionality: Manages the creation, ownership, and redemption of AI Arena Fighter NFTs.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test minting of new fighter NFTs and ensure ownership is correctly assigned.
     • Verify ownership transfer functionality.
     • Ensure merging pool mechanics distribute new NFTs correctly.

// FighterFarmTest.sol
contract FighterFarmTest {
    FighterFarm fighterFarm;

    constructor(FighterFarm _fighterFarm) {
        fighterFarm = _fighterFarm;
    }

    function testMintNewFighter() public {
        // Perform minting operation
        // Assert ownership is correctly assigned
    }

    function testTransferOwnership() public {
        // Perform ownership transfer operation
        // Assert ownership transfer successful
    }

    function testMergingPool() public {
        // Perform merging pool operation
        // Assert correct distribution of new NFTs
    }
}

3. RankedBattle.sol:
   • Functionality: Provides functionality for staking NRN tokens, tracking battle records, and distributing rewards.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test staking functionality with various amounts of NRN tokens.
     • Verify battle outcome calculation and reward distribution.
     • Cover edge cases such as battles with equal strength fighters.

// RankedBattleTest.sol
contract RankedBattleTest {
    RankedBattle rankedBattle;

    constructor(RankedBattle _rankedBattle) {
        rankedBattle = _rankedBattle;
    }

    function testStaking() public {
        // Perform staking operation
        // Assert correct staking amount and state
    }

    function testBattleOutcome() public {
        // Perform battle and calculate outcome
        // Assert correct reward distribution
    }
}

4. StakeAtRisk.sol:
   • Functionality: Manages staking of NRN tokens at risk during battles.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test stake placement and reclaim functionality.
     • Ensure correct stake amount and state after operations.

// StakeAtRiskTest.sol
contract StakeAtRiskTest {
    StakeAtRisk stakeAtRisk;

    constructor(StakeAtRisk _stakeAtRisk) {
        stakeAtRisk = _stakeAtRisk;
    }

    function testStakePlacement() public {
        // Perform stake placement operation
        // Assert correct stake amount and state
    }

    function testReclaimStake() public {
        // Perform stake reclaim operation
        // Assert correct stake reclaim amount
    }
}

5. VoltageManager.sol:
   • Functionality: Manages voltage for game items and provides functions for using and replenishing voltage.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test voltage replenishment functionality.
     • Ensure correct voltage level after replenishment.
     • Cover edge cases such as replenishment with insufficient game items.

// VoltageManagerTest.sol
contract VoltageManagerTest {
    VoltageManager voltageManager;

    constructor(VoltageManager _voltageManager) {
        voltageManager = _voltageManager;
    }

    function testVoltageReplenishment() public {
        // Perform voltage replenishment operation
        // Assert correct voltage level after replenishment
    }
}

6. GameItems.sol:
   • Functionality: Represents a collection of game items used in AI Arena.
   • Testing Plan:
     • Test creation, transfer, and management of in-game items.

// GameItemsTest.sol
contract GameItemsTest {
    GameItems gameItems;

    constructor(GameItems _gameItems) {
        gameItems = _gameItems;
    }

    function testItemCreation() public {
        // Perform item creation operation
        // Assert correct creation and ownership
    }

    function testItemTransfer() public {
        // Perform item transfer operation
        // Assert correct ownership transfer
    }
}

Weakspots and any single points of failure

In the setThresholds function, there is a lack of proper authorization checks to ensure that only authorized parties can update the threshold values. The function allows the owner or an approved sender to modify the threshold values without adequate validation of their permissions. Below is the code snippet of the setThresholds function:

function setThresholds(
    address[] calldata newErc20s,
    uint256[] calldata newAmounts
) public virtual onlyOwnerOrApproved(AccountId) {
    // Implementation logic
}

Without proper access control mechanisms, malicious actors could exploit this vulnerability to manipulate threshold values, leading to unauthorized access to funds or accumulation of excessive token balances. For instance, an attacker could increase the threshold amount for a specific ERC20 token to divert funds or accumulate an unreasonable amount of tokens.

To mitigate this risk, the project should implement robust access control mechanisms, such as role-based permissions or multi-signature authorization, to restrict access to the setThresholds function to authorized parties only. Below is an example of how role-based permissions can be implemented:

mapping(address => bool) public admins;

modifier onlyAdmin() {
    require(admins[msg.sender], "Caller is not an admin");
    _;
}

function setThresholds(
    address[] calldata newErc20s,
    uint256[] calldata newAmounts
) public virtual onlyAdmin {
    // Implementation logic
}

Time spent:

12 hours