This report contains an audit of ICO Skyfchain, conducted in CryptoB2B on July 30, 2018. Were studied the smart cotract, methods of collecting money, protecting investors rights, honesty and publicity of the process. As a result, gross violations of any aspects of the ICO have been identified. For example, the collection of money is carried out in suspicious locations, there are facts of a huge software wind up of monetary transactions, a smart contract is announced, but it is only a screen and in fact does not take any part in the ICO. Overall technical level of the project: extremely bad.
In the article were conducted an audit of the technical component of the MyCryptoBank project: security, methods of collecting money for ICO, claimed MVP, video clip, Whitepaper. There are weaknesses in many points. As for the methods of collecting money, there is an extremely suspicious situation: allegedly serious fees of $ 5M, without the possibility of verifying them, the ICO smart contract is generally absent. This can be an easy basis for criticizing the project by different ICO reviewers, despite a good business rating. The final technical rating, conducted by CryptoB2B for MyCryptoBank on July 26, 2018: 0 out of 10, is bad.
The article provides an audit of the ICO on the gamb.io. Analyzed fees, the work of a smart contract and transactions in the blockchain. Only technical aspects of the process are analyzed. The audit was conducted by analysts and programmers CryptoB2B on July 25, 2018. Unfortunately, there are many signs of fraud. Moreover, this is done at a very primitive level, programmers with extremely low experience, which causes a separate censure. In short, all the fees are a lie, and at the time of writing the audit, $ 1 million of fees were drawn from the air and the hardcap suddenly changed from 30 to 15 million. Unfortunately, this company collected $ 74,000 real money in a detachment with trusted investors. The overall result of the technical audit: 0 out of 10, extremely bad.
I received comments and questions on my article. I’m horrified at how low the level of people giving comments on Solidity code is! In this part, we will analyze in detail the real examples, the qualification of ICO “experts” on the Internet, thoroughly dissecting their logic and features of thought processes. The article has a lot of pictures and code, take heart …
The beginning of the story, part #1 – https://cryptob2b.io/false-allegations-of-scam/
The article describes a serious tendency in the exploitation of the word “scam” people, nothing of themselves representing.
Our group of companies has 350-400 customers on the ICO with a total collection of these customers at $ 2.5 billion and we often encounter one type question from our clients. They are written by people who allegedly found holes on the site, a smart contract, in other facilities. Of course, our customers (the founders of companies going to the ICO) are terribly afraid of this, they pay money to such fraudsters. In fact – this is a whole industry. Students and adults with a small IQ who have not found another job, use mass security scanners or simply fictional technical phrases to scare unsuspecting people. These are blackmailers in IT. read more
Despite the good business rating and rave reviews, from the technical point of view the project UBEX looks like a technical scam: the development plan is not disclosed, instead of the plan – water, release of tokens on the verge of foul, softcap – deception, technical level of the first product (smart contract) – extremely bad, fees of $7 million can not be checked.
UBEX is perhaps the most popular ICO in July 2018. It has collected a very large number of interested people, many revived reviews, videos, laudatory speeches, and positive forecasts have been ordered on the Internet. But…
The article considers a audit of the following objects of the ICO campaign at www.ubex.com, conducted by CryptoB2B on Jule 12, 2018, commissioned by a private investor:
- methods of functioning of the Personal Cabinet about the sale of tokens
- audit of a smart contract
- technical component of the idea of the project (on the basis of reading White Paper).
- critically erroneous approach in the understanding of the blockchain authors
- serious problems with smart contract
- a complete lack of explanation in the WP, how and what the authors of the project are going to do
- despite the steep business rating, our technical rating of the project UBEX: 0/10.