The most critical subjects covered in our audit are functional correctness, access control and precision of arithmetic operations. Security regarding all is generally good. Security regarding functional correctness is good as long as drying out the Aave pool on purpose, see Provoking an Aave Liquidity Crisis, is unprofitable based on the borrow and supply caps, and the flashloan fees.
The general subjects covered are code complexity, error handling, specification and gas inefficiency. Security regarding all the aforementioned subjects is good. However, documentation could be more explicit for makers since the provided arguments on creation should be meaningful but are not checked by code.
All the issues uncovered during the review have been either fixed or acknowledged. In summary, we find that the codebase provides a satisfactory level of security.
It is important to note that security audits are time-boxed and cannot uncover all vulnerabilities. They complement but don’t replace other vital measures to secure a project.