Rock Paper Scissors

Summary

The WinningToken contract does not mint any initial token supply at deployment and lacks a maximum supply cap. While the mint() function is restricted to the contract owner, this design introduces potential operational pitfalls and economic risks. The absence of a maximum supply constraint allows for indefinite minting, which may undermine user trust, compromise tokenomics, and increase the likelihood of accidental or malicious over-minting.

Vulnerability Details

Issue Explanation

There are two major issues with the current design:

1. No Initial Supply Minted at Deployment
   The constructor lacks logic to mint tokens, requiring a manual mint() call post-deployment. If omitted, this could cause dependent contracts or frontends to break due to a zero totalSupply(). It also introduces inconsistency in automated deployments and testnets.

2. No Maximum Supply Cap Defined
   The mint() function allows unbounded minting. Without a hard cap, the total supply can grow indefinitely, which:

   • Undermines the economic model of the token

   • Breaks trust in the scarcity and value of the token

   • Introduces risks if the owner key is compromised or misused

Impact

• Loss of Trust: Users and integrators cannot be assured of token scarcity or supply integrity.

• Tokenomics Breakdown: Without a hard cap, it's impossible to define a predictable economic model.

• Potential Over-Minting: Future developers or compromised owners could mint excessive tokens, leading to dilution or economic collapse of the token system.

Tools Used

• Manual Code Review

Recommendations

To resolve both issues and ensure robustness:

1. Define a constant MAX_SUPPLY to restrict total mintable tokens.

2. Enforce the supply cap within mint().

3. Optionally mint an initial supply in the constructor for immediate utility.