xAudits
220 posts

xAudits
@xAudits
Smart Contracts Audit Service for Rust and Solidity. We enhance the security of the Smart Contracts that revolutionize our world.



We just shared an official update on everything regarding today's bridge contract hack. We appreciate every single person who has shown their support today and sent us their good energies. We will make sure this part of our story becomes part of a great comeback story from here for our community, holders, and partners who have shared positive things about us. There is no other option, but to work 10X harder from here, and show resiliency in the face of adversity. Thank you once again, everybody 🙏


I always tried to understand why in 2025 web3 investors still use to send funds to the token address SC instead of swapping by using a DEX / CEX where the token is listed. I’ve heard stories from the early days when some token contracts actually implemented a “swap” or backdoors by automatically sending back tokens equivalent to the incoming ETH. That pattern is now for sure deprecated. From talking with these newer users (many of whom are first-time @MetaMask users) the main reason this still happens is simple: they add a new token in MetaMask, see its contract address, and accidentally send ETH there. And these are new web3 users, first time using Metamask. So for sure we need better tools, better UI and better security. Today we helped a @ratio1ai community user to recover the funds sent to the R1 token address from Optimism, but R1 token is on Base. Clearly 2 big mistakes: a) not using a DEX, but sending funds to R1 token SC b) sending funds on the wrong chain (Optimism vs Base) The good part was that the second mistake was also the "saving" one, because on Base, R1 SC token is not upgradeable. Also, another lucky part is that on Optimism, we didn't use the token deployer address at all and we have been able to use the same Base nonce to deploy / generate the same SC address, add an withdraw function, recover the funds and sent back to the legit owner. If our Optimism nonce was bigger vs the one used on Base, it would have been impossible to generate the same SC address and recover those funds. How is this possible from a tech perspective? a) Most of the EVM L1 and L2 chains are using the same address space - for example the specific wallet on ETH has the same equivalent / correspondent on Base. b) Contract creation addresses are deterministic, so using the same nonce, you can create/deploy the same SC address if you want from another chain, ofc if you have access to that deployer private key. address = keccak( RLP(sender_address, sender_nonce) )[12:] Big thanks to @alessandrodfr / @xAudits squad for the invaluable support 🫡






Anyone up for an updated #MultiversX ecosytem map? If we're going to achieve mass adoption among Americans, it's important for them to have a comprehensive view of the ecosystem they'll be entering. Credit: @0xMibay

















