UNKNOWN
Scanned September 26, 2026 · Check a different contract →
UNKNOWN
How the owner could rug you
None of the common owner-side rug mechanisms were found in the code. That is not a clean bill of health — see the limits below.
Code: No visible function named mint() or similar in the truncated source; full contract not provided.
Code: No visible pausable modifier or tradingEnabled flag in the shown code; contract body is missing.
Code: No blacklist mapping or check in the visible portion; full implementation not available.
Code: No fee calculation or setter function observed in the excerpt.
Code: The file is labeled as an implementation for a proxy, but no admin or upgrade function is visible.
Code: No function that moves tokens from arbitrary users to the owner is shown.
Code: Ownership variables or renounce functions are not present in the visible code.
This checks only what the code can do. It cannot see whether liquidity is locked, how concentrated holders are, or what the team intends — those need live on-chain data. Absence of these mechanisms is not proof a token is safe.
What this could cost you
How much money would you put into this? We'll show you what you could actually lose — in dollars, not just a scary word like "risk."
None of the common rug mechanisms were found, so there's nothing to calculate against here. That's not the same as "safe" — see the limits above.
This is a proxy contract. The findings below describe the implementation at 0x72beddf7032eec58f199857b79a8e37020c14e42. The implementation can be swapped for different code by whoever controls the upgrade mechanism.
This contract's source is 106,437 characters — only the first 9,000 were analyzed, so parts of it were not examined. That's the real reason, not a vague size limit: 97,437 characters were cut off the end.
What the code allows
Evidence: No mint function or role detected in the excerpt.
This allows: Mint authority would allow token supply expansion.
Evidence: Owner variables or onlyOwner modifiers are not visible.
This allows: Owner privileges can be used to change token behavior.
Evidence: No pause, blacklist, or transfer gate logic appears in the shown code.
This allows: Restrictions can block or limit token transfers.
Evidence: No fee calculation or setter functions are present in the visible portion.
This allows: Fees can be altered to extract value from holders.
Evidence: Implementation file noted, but no upgrade functions are shown.
This allows: Upgradeability lets an admin replace contract logic.
Evidence: No pause/unpause functions or modifiers detected.
This allows: Pausing can halt all token transfers.
Evidence: No renounceOwnership or similar calls are visible.
This allows: Active ownership means privileged actions remain possible.
Worth reading yourself
- ›Only SafeMath library and the beginning of IERC20 interface are present; the actual token implementation is missing due to truncation.
What this did not check
- ›Source code was truncated at 9000 characters, so the full implementation was not analyzed.
- ›Cannot determine presence or absence of minting, pausing, blacklist, fee, upgradeability, or ownership logic without the missing portion.
- ›Liquidity lock status, holder concentration, and actual on‑chain balances are NOT visible in source and were not checked.
Automated review of verified source only. Not an audit. Does not cover on-chain state, holder distribution, liquidity, or deployer behavior. It cannot tell you whether a token is safe or whether to buy it. Absence of a finding is not evidence that a contract is sound — it may mean the relevant code was not readable, not verified, or not reached.
Want more than the free read?
A real security researcher personally reads this contract's verified source — not an automated re-run of the free check.
What's checked
The same 7 owner-power categories as the free check — mint authority, ability to disable trading, blacklist power, mutable fees, upgradeability, privileged withdrawal, and whether ownership is still active — plus 4 categories the free tier doesn't cover: exact current fee values and where they're set, whether ownership itself can be transferred (and to whom), any hardcoded or owner-settable exceptions to fees/limits/blacklist, and external contracts this one calls out to and trusts.
How it's done
I read the contract's actual verified source directly — no token-window truncation, since a person isn't limited by an LLM's context size the way the free tier is. Every finding cites the specific function or modifier it comes from; if the code doesn't determine something, the report says so instead of guessing.
What you get
A written report emailed to you within 24 hours: a plain-English summary, every finding with its evidence, and what the review could not determine from source alone.
Disclaimer: this is a capability review of verified source code, not a formal security audit and not investment advice. It reports what the contract's owner/admin technically CAN do — it does not check on-chain state, liquidity depth, holder concentration, or deployer behavior, and it does not certify a contract as safe.
Building something that needs this programmatically?
By purchasing, you agree to our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.
This is a surface read
It reports capabilities visible in source. It does not model economics, test exploit paths, or reason about how contracts interact. A real review does — with runnable proofs for anything it claims.
Request a security review →Paid reviews go further than this free scan: every finding is signed, timestamped, and hash-chained into a record — self-scored 16/20 against an independent standard →