⇐ Back to the beginning of the blog

Skyfchain ICO: review, audit

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.

img 5b5e713cc0d88 - Skyfchain ICO: review, audit

read more

MyCryptoBank ICO: review, audit [rate: bad]

img 5b59b416e39df - MyCryptoBank ICO: review, audit [rate: 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.

read more

GAMB ICO: review, audit [rate: very bad]

img 5b5821a2a7bf5 - GAMB ICO: review, audit [rate: very 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.

read more

Analysis of steep ICO “experts”

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/

read more

UBEX ICO: review, audit, security [rate: very bad]

img 5b4dc7caaa22d - UBEX ICO: review, audit, security [rate: very bad]

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).

Preliminary conclusion:

  • 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.

Read more:

read more

⇐ Back to the beginning of the blog