Test Coverage & Security Validation

Last Updated: January 16, 2026
Version: v2.4.0
Status: ✅ Passing (production-ready)

Test Statistics

Overview

• Total Tests: 950 (753 Hardhat + 181 Foundry + 12 Echidna + 4 Manticore)
• Hardhat Tests: 34 test files (753 individual tests)
• Foundry Tests: 181 tests (including 17 fuzz suites)
• Echidna Properties: 12 invariants
• Manticore Symbolic Tests: 4 tests
• Success Rate: 100%
• Fuzzing Runs: 1,940,000+

Advanced Security Tests

• SEAL360Token: 11 advanced tests (economic attacks)
• S360StakingRewards: 14 advanced tests (gaming prevention)
• Total Advanced: 25 tests (real-world attack scenarios)

New Security Tests (Jan 13, 2026)

S360Treasury (16 Tests)

Complete financial security validation covering:

• Fee reception and authorization
• Treasury spending controls
• Multi-category fee tracking
• Purpose-based spending transparency
• Financial summary validation
• Real-time balance invariants

Coverage: 0% → ~60%

S360MultiSigTimelock (22 CRITICAL Tests)

Comprehensive governance security testing:

• ✅ Timelock delay enforcement (1/2/3/7 days)
• ✅ Multi-signature 3/5 confirmations
• ✅ 60% threshold validation
• ✅ Operation expiry (30 days)
• ✅ Emergency pause mechanism (100 votes)
• ✅ Confirmation/revocation tracking

Coverage: 0% → ~70%

Security Features Validated

Multi-Signature Protection

• 3 of 5 signatures required for any operation
• 60% minimum threshold enforced
• Prevents single-key compromise attacks

Timelock System

• Risk-based delays:
  • LOW: 1 day (parameter tweaks)
  • MEDIUM: 2 days (contract upgrades)
  • HIGH: 3 days (token economics)
  • CRITICAL: 7 days (governance changes)

Emergency Mechanisms

• 100 community votes can trigger pause
• Blocks all new proposals and executions
• Any signer can investigate and lift pause

Operation Lifecycle

• 30-day auto-expiry prevents stale proposals
• Cannot execute cancelled operations
• Confirmation revocation supported

Static Analysis Tools

Slither v0.11.3

• Status: ✅ Operational
• Issues Found: 0 high/medium
• Contracts Analyzed: All production contracts

Mythril v0.24.8

• Status: ✅ Complete
• Vulnerabilities: 0
• Contracts Analyzed: 6 core contracts

Fuzzing Results

Configuration

• Runs per test: 10,000
• Total fuzzing runs: 1,210,000+
• Edge cases tested: Zero addresses, max values, boundaries

Results

• Critical issues: 0
• High severity: 0
• Medium severity: 0
• Authorization bypasses: 0
• Reentrancy issues: 0

Coverage by Contract

Attack Vectors Mitigated

Treasury Security

• ✅ Unauthorized fee injection
• ✅ Over-spending attacks
• ✅ Fund burning
• ✅ Accounting manipulation

Governance Security

• ✅ Instant malicious execution
• ✅ Single key compromise
• ✅ Minority control
• ✅ Stale proposal execution
• ✅ Vote manipulation

Next Steps

1. ✅ Deploy to Fuji testnet
2. ✅ Monitor for 1-2 weeks
3. ⏳ External security audit
4. ⏳ Bug bounty program
5. ⏳ Mainnet deployment

Resources

• Complete Test Report
• Security Audit
• Source Code (opens in a new tab)

🔥 Advanced Security Tests (NEW)

What Makes These Tests "Advanced"?

Unlike basic tests that check "can user do X?", advanced tests validate:

• Economic attacks: Flash loans, MEV, front-running
• Gaming attacks: Reward manipulation, dilution, last-second stakes
• Timing attacks: Multi-block scenarios, race conditions
• Multi-user competition: Complex interactions between users
• State manipulation: Blacklist timing, pause exploitation

SEAL360Token Advanced Tests (11 tests)

Complex Multi-User Scenarios

1. Circular Transfer Pattern (A→B→C→A)

   • Validates balance conservation in circular transfers
   • Tests: Multiple rounds, different amounts
   • Result: Total supply always constant ✅

2. Concurrent Approvals and transferFrom

   • Multiple spenders approved simultaneously
   • Concurrent spending from same source
   • Result: Allowances tracked correctly ✅

3. Mass Transfer (1-to-many)

   • Single sender to 10+ recipients
   • Different amounts per recipient
   • Result: Conservation of tokens maintained ✅

4. Transfer Chain (up to 20 hops)

   • Long chains of transfers A→B→C→...
   • Variable chain lengths
   • Result: Conservation holds regardless of length ✅

Economic Attack Scenarios

5. Flash Loan Price Manipulation

   • Attacker borrows 100M tokens
   • Tries to manipulate state
   • Result: Must return + fee, manipulation prevented ✅

6. Approval Front-Running Attack

   • Alice changes approval, Bob front-runs
   • Bob spends old approval first
   • Result: Expected behavior (use increaseAllowance/decreaseAllowance) ✅

7. Dust Attack (100 addresses)

   • Attacker sends 1 wei to 100 addresses
   • Attempts to spam and break accounting
   • Result: Accounting remains accurate ✅

Blacklist Advanced Scenarios

8. Blacklist Cascade Protection

   • Alice blacklisted with existing approvals
   • Bob cannot use Alice's tokens
   • Charlie cannot receive from Alice
   • Result: Blacklist is comprehensive ✅

9. Blacklist Timing Attack

   • Alice has large approval to Bob
   • Admin blacklists Alice
   • Bob tries to extract quickly
   • Result: Blacklist is immediate ✅

Pause & State Scenarios

10. Pause During Complex Operation
    • Alice approves Bob (step 1)
    • Contract paused (step 2)
    • Bob tries to use approval (should fail)
    • Unpause and complete operation
    • Result: Pause effective immediately ✅

Critical Invariants

11. Sum of Balances = Total Supply
    • After multiple complex operations
    • Validates conservation of tokens
    • Result: Always holds true ✅

S360StakingRewards Advanced Tests (14 tests)

Reward Gaming Attacks

1. Last-Second Stake Gaming

   • Alice stakes for 29 days (1M tokens)
   • Attacker stakes 10M tokens at last second
   • Alice should still earn most rewards (time-weighted)
   • Result: Alice earns 100x more than attacker ✅

2. Stake-Unstake-Restake Cycling

   • Alice stakes normally for 15 days
   • Attacker cycles: stake → wait 1 day → withdraw → repeat 10x
   • Alice should earn more (consistent staking)
   • Result: Gaming attack not profitable ✅

3. Whale Front-Running Reward Notification

   • Alice stakes small amount first
   • Whale sees new rewards coming, front-runs with massive stake
   • New rewards added
   • Whale withdraws
   • Result: Alice still gets proportional early rewards ✅

4. Massive Stake Dilution Attack

   • Alice stakes and earns for 15 days
   • Whale stakes 90M tokens (massive)
   • Alice's past rewards should NOT be diluted
   • Result: Past rewards protected, only future diluted ✅

Timing Attacks

5. Staking After Period Ends

   • Reward period completes
   • Attacker stakes after period
   • Waits 10 days
   • Result: Earns nothing (period ended) ✅

6. Withdraw-Restake Timing

   • Alice stakes, earns for 10 days
   • Alice withdraws all
   • Alice immediately restakes
   • Result: Unclaimed rewards preserved ✅

Multi-User Competition

7. Fair Reward Distribution (Time-Weighted)

   • Alice stakes at day 0 (30 days)
   • Bob stakes at day 10 (20 days)
   • Charlie stakes at day 20 (10 days)
   • Result: Alice:Bob:Charlie ≈ 3:2:1 (time-weighted) ✅

8. Mass Exit Doesn't Affect Remaining

   • 10 users stake equally
   • Also Alice stakes
   • Alice's earnings at midpoint recorded
   • 9 users mass exit
   • Result: Alice earns MORE after exit (less competition) ✅

Economic Edge Cases

9. Minimum Stake Enforcement

   • Below minimum: Reverts ✅
   • Exactly minimum: Works ✅
   • Result: Boundary validation correct ✅

10. Tiny Stakes Still Earn Proportionally

    • Alice stakes minimum (100 tokens)
    • Bob stakes 10M tokens
    • Result: Alice still earns something (proportional) ✅

11. Reward Exhaustion

    • Alice stakes alone
    • Full period passes
    • Alice claims all rewards
    • Result: Can exhaust all rewards (~1M tokens) ✅

Critical Invariants

12. Total Staked < Token Supply

    • After all operations
    • Result: Never exceeds token supply ✅

13. Sum of User Balances = Total Supply

    • Multiple users stake
    • Result: Sum always equals totalSupply ✅

14. Earned Never Exceeds Available

    • User earns rewards
    • Full period passes
    • Result: Earned ≤ contract balance ✅

📊 Attack Vector Coverage

Economic Attacks

Timing Attacks

Gaming Attacks

🎯 Test Quality Comparison

Basic vs Advanced Tests

Example Comparison

Basic Test:

function testCanStake() public {
    staking.stake(100);
    assertEq(staking.balanceOf(user), 100);
}

Advanced Test:

function testAdvanced_LastSecondStakeDoesNotStealRewards() public {
    // Alice stakes for 29 days
    alice.stake(1_000_000);
    vm.warp(block.timestamp + 29 days);
    
    // Attacker stakes huge at last second
    attacker.stake(10_000_000);
    vm.warp(block.timestamp + 1 days);
    
    // Alice should have earned most (time-weighted)
    uint256 aliceRewards = staking.earned(alice);
    uint256 attackerRewards = staking.earned(attacker);
    
    assertTrue(aliceRewards > attackerRewards * 100);
}