fixes:
  - id: 1
    explanation: 'These arithmetic inversions just break the logic of the contract by gradually reducing the available supply.'
  - id: 2
    explanation: 'The supply is no longer increased after minting, changing the behavior of the contract but not fixing any potential security issue.'
  - id: 3
    explanation: 'Not emitting the event that notifies listeners about the minting of a new NFT makes the contract completely useless.'
  - id: 4
    explanation: "Using SafeMath's sub() fuction fixes any potential underflow attack against the tokenId variable of type uint256."
hints:
  - 'What problem can occur when dealing with Integer variables?'
  - 'Read up specifically on Integer overflow and underflow issues in Solidity to understand the problem better.'
