Sensitive owner actions (like burns) should emit a dedicated event so indexers, dashboards, and auditors can reliably track who burned what, when, and from which source.
burnFaucetTokens performs a burn without emitting a contract-specific event; relying only on ERC-20 Transfer(to=0) makes it hard to distinguish faucet-initiated burns from other transfers and obscures owner activity.
Likelihood:
Burns are an administrative action expected to occur occasionally (supply adjustments, resets), so missing logs will repeatedly affect monitoring.
Off-chain consumers (indexers/alerts) depend on explicit events to classify actions.
Impact:
Poor transparency & forensics: Harder to attribute burns to owner decisions vs. generic token flows.
Operational gaps: Dashboards/alerts may miss or mislabel burns, complicating compliance and incident response.
A test that performs a burn cannot assert on a domain-specific event (e.g., FaucetTokensBurned) because none is emitted, forcing brittle reliance on generic Transfer(to=0) decoding.
Emit a dedicated event capturing the actor, source, and amount; emit it after a successful burn.
The contest is live. Earn rewards by submitting a finding.
This is your time to appeal against judgements on your submissions.
Appeals are being carefully reviewed by our judges.