CRITICALETH sent to an arbitrary, user-controlled address
MEDIUMStrict equality on balances/tokens
MEDIUMsend() return value not checked
MEDIUMsend() return value not checked
MEDIUMLow-level call return value not checked
MEDIUMContract can receive ETH but has no withdrawal path
MEDIUMCentralization risk (absolute admin powers)
MEDIUMCentralization risk (absolute admin powers)
MEDIUMCentralization risk (absolute admin powers)
MEDIUMCentralization risk (absolute admin powers)
LOWMissing events on math-parameter changes
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWblock.timestamp dependence
LOWUnimplemented function bodies
LOWUnimplemented function bodies
LOWMissing zero-address check
LOWEmpty code block
LOWEmpty code block
INFORMATIONALOutdated Solidity compiler
INFORMATIONALOutdated Solidity compiler
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
INFORMATIONALNaming convention violation
Preview only — no exploit details or fix recommendations are published here
to avoid disclosing an unpatched issue before the contract owner sees it. Full report (RU+EN), exact lines,
exploit path and fork PoC — via the bot below.
If you're the contract owner and believe this automated finding is inaccurate,
or want this page reviewed or removed, send us your contact details and we'll get back to you.
Auto-audit by SecurityLab (slither+aderyn). Static analysis only unless noted as PoC-confirmed —
not a substitute for a manual audit before mainnet deployment with real funds.