Research Suggests Tron’s Codebase Consists of Plagiarized Codes
After Digital Asset Research (DAR) assessed TRON’s codebase, they arrived in the conclusion that the firm’s developers plagiarized codes from other existing projects. By this what DAR means to say is that certain function and variable names were changed to make traceability to the original code beyond challenging.
DAR shared the details regarding this finding on a Medium post, which suggested that the majority of the copied codes came from that of platforms like Ethereum. This is definitely going to be problematic for the Tron team that many praised for their ongoing efforts, as they will be faced with legal and technical consequences. This is surely to hurt them, as their MainNet launch has been set for June 25th.
DAR mentioned that:
“The project was initially accused of violating the GNU Lesser General Public v3.0 (LGPL) because the project did not mention its client, Java-Tron was derived from EthereumJ, which is one of the first Ethereum libraries.”
DAR researchers also added the fact that the codes had only included the “LPGL language to 14 of the files,” which suggests that what remains was copied without “appropriate reference”.
Lucas Nuzzi, a representative of DAR, got the opportunity to discuss such matters with CNN, who also reported it. Nuzzi appears to have presented visual evidence of the accusations made. He not only broke down the different changes Tron developers made to make their code unique, but also discussed the potential risks tied to them.
Here’s Nuzzi’s description of the code at hand:
“In the commit above, developers went through the hassle of changing the title of some functions to hide the plagiarism, as evidenced by commit d4ad9c9. There is no valid reason to change the Ethereum J’s public class “name,” to “dataBaseName”.
Due to Tron’s plagiarism, the code could be at risk, as each supposedly serves a different purpose and testing for it can be tough. Evidently, the technical aspect can bring unforeseen issues. Nuzzi specifically stated,
“Vulnerabilities that were not applicable to the original system are now applicable to new one. Plagiarism is bad, but the concern here relates to the unknown vulnerabilities that may arise when you combine all of these modules together.”
Nuzzi detailed that evaluating TRON’s code was a mere luck. It was a digital asset that came about and evaluating it is the company’s requirement for the services offered. Their role is to analyze digital assets on all specs that way investors have enough knowledge to determine whether or not they should contribute to a project. Just like that, Tron was one that they looked into. Normally, the conclusions are reserved for their clients only, however, in special cases like this where the mass population might be involved, they felt it was mandatory of them.
How will Tron’s MainNet launch go? Will Tron be faced with severe consequences? While the former will be interesting to see, the latter is bound to happen. Unfortunately, no one from Tron’s team commented or took to social media to defend their position.
🤔 I can’t figure this one out. Why in the world would almost EVERY crypto exchange be supporting the #TRON token migration. Why?!!
— T. @WLFOFMYST (@WLFOFMYST) June 22, 2018
— Crypto_T000P (@btoop88) June 22, 2018