GaultPaymentGateway
Scanned August 14, 2026 · Check a different contract →
GaultPaymentGateway
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 explicit mint function found in the provided code
Code: No explicit function to disable trading found in the provided code
Code: No explicit function to blacklist addresses found in the provided code
Code: No explicit function to change fees found in the provided code
Code: No explicit upgrade mechanism found in the provided code
Code: No explicit function to withdraw user funds found in the provided code
Code: No explicit function to renounce ownership found in the provided 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 contract's source is characters — only the first were analyzed, so parts of it were not examined. That's the real reason, not a vague size limit: NaN characters were cut off the end.
What the code allows
Evidence: No explicit owner privileges found in the provided code
This allows: The owner's privileges could potentially be used to harm holders
Evidence: No explicit transfer restrictions found in the provided code
This allows: Transfer restrictions could potentially be used to limit the ability of holders to sell their tokens
Evidence: No explicit fees on transfer found in the provided code
This allows: Fees on transfer could potentially be used to take a portion of the value of tokens being transferred
What this did not check
- ›The provided code is truncated at 22000 characters, which may limit the ability to identify certain features or mechanisms.
- ›Liquidity lock, holder concentration, and actual on-chain balances are not visible in the source code and were not checked.
- ›The analysis is based on the provided code and may not reflect the actual behavior of the contract on the blockchain.
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 →