Mayo Swap Deflationary Hack

Notice: This page is a freshly imported case study from the original repository. The original content was in a different format, and may not have relevant information for all sections. Please help restructure the content by moving information from the 'About' and 'General Prevention' sections to other sections, and add any missing information or sources you can find. If you are new here, please read General Tutorial on Wikis or Anatomy of a Case Study for help getting started.

Notice: This page contains sources which are not attributed to any text. The unattributed sources follow the initial description. Please assist by visiting each source, reviewing the content, and placing that reference next to any text it can be used to support. Feel free to add any information that you come across which isn't present already. Sources which don't contain any relevant information can be removed. Broken links can be replaced with versions from the Internet Archive. See General Tutorial on Wikis, Anatomy of a Case Study, and/or Citing Your Sources Guide for additional information. Thanks for your help!

Mayo Swap

MayoSwap is a copy of PantherSwap. All funds are stored in a smart contract hot wallet. This contract had an error in the way deflationary tokens were handled, which caused extra rewards to be released.

All investors lost their funds as the hacker cashed out and the price of the token plummeted to zero. The project appears to be continuing to operate with a new smart contract that has since been audited by TechRate, however the project Twitter does not appear to exist.

This is a global/international case not involving a specific country.

About Mayo Swap

"MayoSwap is an automatic liquidity acquisition yield farm running on Binance Smart Chain with lots of unique and creative features that let you earn and win."

"Each transfer of MAYO must pay a 5% transfer tax. The 4% transfer tax gets added to the liquidity pool through the contract automatically to raise the price floor continuously. And the liquidity will be locked and inaccessible." "By reducing the amount of MAYO generated per block, we slow the inflation. But we don't want to do this too frequently, too early, for the same reason we don't want a hard cap: we still need to incentivize people to provide liquidity."

"When users put their tokens into liquidity pools and stake their LP tokens in a farm, they put their crypto tokens in a bank. But this time the bank is a protocol created by someone anonymous. Especially users that move between the high-APY yield farms are at risk."

On "June 16th, multiple farms their native tokens were exploited all the way to $0.00. KetchupSwap, Lokum, YBear, Piggy, CaramelSwap. Sadly enough GoCerberus and Garuda were exploited as well." "A major exploit has affected multiple BSC farms by driving their native token prices to 0." "Cerberus, Garuda, KetchupSwap, Piggy, CaramelSwap, and a few more projects got exploited at the same time, because of mishandling of tokens with transfer tax."

"Most of the yield farms use a trusted contract called a MasterChef, which is used even by PancakeSwap themselves to distribute rewards. The problem is that the MasterChef was never designed for all these special tokens, it was designed specifically to receive rewards for LP tokens."

"But, yield farms kept popping up and adding non-LP tokens and everything was fine. Until recently tokens with a transfer fee became more popular. Most of our tokens have a transfer fee as well, it’s how we can have our tokenomics. But the problem is that the MasterChef was not designed for this."

"Due to the design of the masterchef if you stake 100 tokens (with a 5% transaction fee) in a MasterChef, you are still able to withdraw 100 tokens from the MasterChef. But due to the transfer fee, only 95 tokens actually arrived in the contract."

This is a global/international case not involving a specific country.

The background of the exchange platform, service, or individuals involved, as it would have been seen or understood at the time of the events.

Include:

• Known history of when and how the service was started.
• What problems does the company or service claim to solve?
• What marketing materials were used by the firm or business?
• Audits performed, and excerpts that may have been included.
• Business registration documents shown (fake or legitimate).
• How were people recruited to participate?
• Public warnings and announcements prior to the event.

Don't Include:

• Any wording which directly states or implies that the business is/was illegitimate, or that a vulnerability existed.
• Anything that wasn't reasonably knowable at the time of the event.

There could be more than one section here. If the same platform is involved with multiple incidents, then it can be linked to a main article page.

The Reality

This sections is included if a case involved deception or information that was unknown at the time. Examples include:

• When the service was actually started (if different than the "official story").
• Who actually ran a service and their own personal history.
• How the service was structured behind the scenes. (For example, there was no "trading bot".)
• Details of what audits reported and how vulnerabilities were missed during auditing.

What Happened

The specific events of the loss and how it came about. What actually happened to cause the loss and some of the events leading up to it.

Key Event Timeline - Mayo Swap Deflationary Hack

Date	Event	Description
June 16th, 2021	Main Event	Expand this into a brief description of what happened and the impact. If multiple lines are necessary, add them here.

Technical Details

This section includes specific detailed technical analysis of any security breaches which happened. What specific software vulnerabilities contributed to the problem and how were they exploited?

Total Amount Lost

The total amount lost is unknown.

How much was lost and how was it calculated? If there are conflicting reports, which are accurate and where does the discrepancy lie?

Immediate Reactions

How did the various parties involved (firm, platform, management, and/or affected individual(s)) deal with the events? Were services shut down? Were announcements made? Were groups formed?

Ultimate Outcome

What was the end result? Was any investigation done? Were any individuals prosecuted? Was there a lawsuit? Was any tracing done?

Total Amount Recovered

There do not appear to have been any funds recovered in this case.

What funds were recovered? What funds were reimbursed for those affected users?

Ongoing Developments

What parts of this case are still remaining to be concluded?

General Prevention Policies

Hot wallets should either not store customer funds, or be insured fully.

Individual Prevention Policies

No specific policies for individual prevention have yet been identified in this case.

For the full list of how to protect your funds as an individual, check our Prevention Policies for Individuals guide.

Platform Prevention Policies

Policies for platforms to take to prevent this situation have not yet been selected in this case.

For the full list of how to protect your funds as a financial service, check our Prevention Policies for Platforms guide.

Regulatory Prevention Policies

No specific regulatory policies have yet been identified in this case.

For the full list of regulatory policies that can prevent loss, check our Prevention Policies for Regulators guide.