Our analysts, at the request of a potential private investor who wants to invest in the xchng.io project (Kochava), have ordered an audit. The audit revealed numerous problems and technical errors, suspicions of technical fraud, poor quality of ICO preparation and project readiness. All statements in the White paper, mostly unfounded, without detail, contain the abstract reasoning “How everything should work”. The audit mainly analyzed White paper. A careful analysis of the smart contract was not possible due to its terribly low quality (nothing to analyze). In case of loss / change of the White paper from the XCHNG website, a copy is made: goo.gl/bErzza
While reading this document: we offer the reader to open the White paper of the project in parallel in the browser – the document constantly refers to the specific pages of the White paper in order to avoid extreme copying of the text. The website xchng.io and the methods of organizing ICO were also partially analyzed. The author of the document, the auditor: Dmitry Borodin.
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