CRITICALETH sent to an arbitrary, user-controlled address
MEDIUMtransfer()/transferFrom() return value not checked
MEDIUMExternal calls inside a loop
MEDIUMExternal calls inside a loop
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)
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
LOWMissing zero-address check
LOWAccess control issue (manual review required)
LOWAccess control issue (manual review required)
LOWAccess control issue (manual review required)
LOWAccess control issue (manual review required)
LOWAccess control issue (manual review required)
INFORMATIONALOutdated Solidity compiler
INFORMATIONALLow-level call usage
INFORMATIONALLow-level call usage
INFORMATIONALPUSH0 opcode (requires Shanghai EVM)
INFORMATIONALInconsistent type naming
OPTIMIZATIONAccess control issue (manual review required)
OPTIMIZATIONAccess control issue (manual review required)
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.