Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

On-chain security analysis — is it a scam or legit?

Is CTR Safe?

Base
Not verified This record has not gone through deep verification and is not being monitored. The score is a dated snapshot — the token’s risk can change at any time.Own this token? Put it under verification →
Last checked Sep 4, 2026 · 1 audit on record
Chart
Medium RiskHow is this score calculated?
How the score breaks downratings: 10 is safest
Technical8/10Governance2/10Upgrades7/10Checks passed3 of 5Findings1 High · 1 Medium · 1 Low · 1 Info4
SummaryAI Copilot

The Citrea Token OFT contract is a minimal implementation of a LayerZero Omnichain Fungible Token (OFT), inheriting from LayerZero's OFT base contract and OpenZeppelin's Ownable.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Ownership not renounced — strong Multisig
  • Top-10 concentration > 50%
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • LP top1 unlocked holder = 100.0%
  • LP top3 unlocked holders = 100.0%
  • 1 High finding(s) from audit
  • 1 Medium finding(s) from audit
  • 1 Low finding(s) from audit
Exact factors
  • Ownership NOT renounced — strong Multisig (3-of-5)
  • Top-10 concentration > 50% (84.1% total → 52.8% effective; 31.9% in EOAs, 52.2% in contracts — heavy)
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • LP top1 unlocked holder = 100.0% (independent LP — depth risk, pool = 98% of DEX liquidity)
  • LP top3 unlocked holders = 100.0% (independent LP — depth risk, pool = 98% of DEX liquidity)
  • 1 High finding(s) from audit
  • 1 Medium finding(s) from audit
  • 1 Low finding(s) from audit

Each factor is an on-chain fact recorded at the time of this analysis. The score is computed from them by a deterministic function, so the same contract returns the same score for anyone who runs the audit. How scores are computed

Security Checklist

as of audit · Sep 43 of 5 checks passed
Contract verifiedVerified
OwnershipRetained
MintNo mint
Liquidity lockNot locked
UpgradeabilityFixed code

Holders

as of audit · Sep 4, 2026
52.2%Contracts31.9%Wallets15.9%Everyone else
52.2%Contracts31.9%Wallets15.9%Everyone else
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
84.1%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking52.2%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell31.9%
  • Everyone elsethe rest of the supply15.9%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads52.8%
How holder types affect the score

Share held by contracts — treasury, vesting, bridge or staking — is discounted against share held by wallets when the score is computed: a contract cannot decide to sell the way an anonymous holder can, though it can still be drained or voted to sell. Effective concentration is the figure the risk score is actually calculated from.

Holder balances as recorded by the audit of Sep 4, 2026

Liquidity

as of audit · Sep 4$525.8K across 5 pairs

The risk score reads depth across every pair.

LP tokensNot locked

The LP tokens of the analysed pool are not locked or burned, so whoever holds them can withdraw that liquidity.

Analysed pool$514.5KShare of depth97.8%
Top-1 Unlocked Holder100.0%
Top-3 Unlocked100.0%
Unlocked LP held by
0x08cd…a4a60x7234…dece

No privileged address appears among these holders: the unlocked liquidity sits with independent providers, not with the deployer.

Security Findings

1 High1 Medium1 Low1 Info
High

Centralized Control over Cross-Chain Functionality

The owner (a 3/5 multisig) has extensive control over the LayerZero OFT configuration, including setting trusted remotes, minimum destination gas, and potentially pausing cross-chain transfers via the inherited OFT functions. A compromise of the multisig could lead to redirection of cross-chain funds, denial of service for cross-chain operations, or manipulation of fees (7.3 Access Control, 7.4 Economic, 7.5 Governance).H-01

Issue

The owner (a 3/5 multisig) has extensive control over the LayerZero OFT configuration, including setting trusted remotes, minimum destination gas, and potentially pausing cross-chain transfers via the inherited OFT functions. A compromise of the multisig could lead to redirection of cross-chain funds, denial of service for cross-chain operations, or manipulation of fees (7.3 Access Control, 7.4 Economic, 7.5 Governance).

Fix

Ensure the multisig controlling the owner address adheres to the highest security standards, including robust key management, secure signing procedures, and regular audits of its members. Implement strict internal controls and monitoring for all owner-privileged functions. Consider a time-lock for critical configuration changes if feasible for the protocol's operational needs.

Status

Unresolved

Medium

Reliance on External LayerZero Protocol Security

The CitreaTokenOFT contract is a wrapper around the LayerZero OFT implementation. Its security is fundamentally tied to the security and integrity of the LayerZero v2 protocol and its smart contracts (e.g., OFT.sol, ILayerZeroEndpointV2.sol). Any vulnerabilities or exploits within the LayerZero endpoint, message libraries, or OFT base contract could directly affect the safety of funds managed by this token (7.6 External).M-01

Issue

The CitreaTokenOFT contract is a wrapper around the LayerZero OFT implementation. Its security is fundamentally tied to the security and integrity of the LayerZero v2 protocol and its smart contracts (e.g., OFT.sol, ILayerZeroEndpointV2.sol). Any vulnerabilities or exploits within the LayerZero endpoint, message libraries, or OFT base contract could directly affect the safety of funds managed by this token (7.6 External).

Fix

Stay informed about LayerZero protocol updates, security audits, and any reported vulnerabilities. Implement robust monitoring for LayerZero endpoint activity and cross-chain transactions involving the token. While direct mitigation within this contract is limited, awareness and rapid response capabilities are crucial.

Status

Unresolved

Low

Lack of Explicit Event Emission for Critical Owner Actions

While the inherited OFT base contract likely emits events for its critical functions (e.g., setPeer, setMinDstGas), the CitreaTokenOFT itself does not add any custom events for its constructor or any potential future owner-controlled functions. Explicit events for all critical state changes improve transparency and monitoring for off-chain systems (7.2 Code Security, 7.8 Operations).L-01

Issue

While the inherited OFT base contract likely emits events for its critical functions (e.g., setPeer, setMinDstGas), the CitreaTokenOFT itself does not add any custom events for its constructor or any potential future owner-controlled functions. Explicit events for all critical state changes improve transparency and monitoring for off-chain systems (7.2 Code Security, 7.8 Operations).

Fix

For any future custom owner-controlled functions added to CitreaTokenOFT, ensure that appropriate events are emitted to log critical state changes. Review the OFT base contract's events to confirm comprehensive coverage for cross-chain configuration changes.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Immutability of LayerZero Endpoint Address

The LayerZero endpoint address (_lzEndpoint) is set in the constructor and cannot be changed after deployment. While this ensures stability and prevents malicious modification, it means that if the LayerZero endpoint itself needs to be upgraded or replaced (e.g., due to a critical vulnerability or protocol evolution), the CitreaTokenOFT contract would need to be redeployed, requiring users to migrate their tokens (7.1 Architecture, 7.7 Upgrades).I-01

Issue

The LayerZero endpoint address (_lzEndpoint) is set in the constructor and cannot be changed after deployment. While this ensures stability and prevents malicious modification, it means that if the LayerZero endpoint itself needs to be upgraded or replaced (e.g., due to a critical vulnerability or protocol evolution), the CitreaTokenOFT contract would need to be redeployed, requiring users to migrate their tokens (7.1 Architecture, 7.7 Upgrades).

Fix

This is an architectural design choice. Acknowledge the implications of an immutable endpoint. If future flexibility is desired, consider an upgradeable proxy pattern for the token or a mechanism to update the endpoint address, though this adds complexity and potential attack surface.

Status

Unresolved

Analysis

AI Copilotas of audit · Sep 4
Executive SummaryWhat the contract is and what the review found

The Citrea Token OFT contract is a minimal implementation of a LayerZero Omnichain Fungible Token (OFT), inheriting from LayerZero's OFT base contract and OpenZeppelin's Ownable. The contract facilitates cross-chain token transfers via the LayerZero v2 protocol. The audit focused on the contract's specific implementation, its interaction with LayerZero, and its access control mechanisms. Key findings include centralized control over cross-chain configurations and inherent reliance on the security of the LayerZero protocol.

Technical8/10Low risk

The CitreaTokenOFT contract is minimal, primarily inheriting from LayerZero's OFT and OpenZeppelin's Ownable. The code is straightforward and uses a recent Solidity version (0.8.33), benefiting from checked arithmetic. The primary technical risk stems from its reliance on the LayerZero v2 protocol, as any vulnerabilities in the external OFT library or LayerZero endpoint could directly impact the token's security (7.6 External). For instance, a bug in the OFT's _debit or _credit functions could lead to incorrect token accounting.

Governance2/10High risk

The contract employs an Ownable pattern, with the owner being a 3/5 multisig, which enhances security compared to a single EOA. This owner has significant control over critical cross-chain functionalities, such as setting trusted remotes and minimum destination gas for LayerZero operations (7.3 Access Control). While necessary for configuration, this centralization introduces a point of control that, if compromised, could lead to economic risks like fund redirection or service disruption (7.4 Economic). For example, a malicious owner could set a trusted remote to an attacker-controlled address.

Upgrades7/10Low risk

The CitreaTokenOFT contract is not designed as an upgradeable proxy, meaning its logic is immutable once deployed. This simplifies the architecture by avoiding upgrade-related complexities and risks (7.7 Upgrades). However, any future changes to the token's core logic or a need to update the LayerZero endpoint would necessitate a complete redeployment and user migration, which can be a complex and disruptive process. This design choice prioritizes immutability over flexibility.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

Ensure the multisig controlling the owner address is robustly secured with strong operational procedures and key management.

Regularly monitor the LayerZero protocol for security updates and announcements, as the contract's security is directly tied to its external dependencies. Consider implementing additional monitoring for critical owner actions and cross-chain transfer events to enhance operational oversight and detect potential anomalies promptly.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
TypeCitreaTokenOFT
NetworkBase
Token age1y
Contract0x1103…57f7
Deployer0xb6ef…5e96
Badge for your website
CTR security record badge

Free for any token on the record. It links to this page and always shows the current score and the date it was checked.

Audit History
  1. Sep 4, 202652Medium
  2. Aug 11, 202648Medium

Score changes are recorded as dated snapshots — history is append-only and cannot be edited.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the CTR contract address?

The CTR contract on Base is 0x11030f79109269d796fd0fb956d6244e502757f7. Compare it with the address the project itself publishes before trading: other contracts can carry the same name and ticker.

Is CTR a scam?

Quantum Audit's risk score for CTR is 52/100 (Medium risk) as of Sep 4, 2026, computed by a deterministic function from on-chain facts — Contract verified: Verified; Ownership: Retained; Mint: No mint; Liquidity lock: Not locked; Upgradeability: Fixed code. A score is a dated snapshot of those facts, not a guarantee; each one is listed on this page.

Is CTR liquidity locked?

Liquidity lock: Not locked (as of Sep 4, 2026). Total DEX liquidity: $525.8K.

Who holds CTR?

As of Sep 4, 2026, the 10 largest holders own 84.1% of the supply. The Holders section on this page shows who they are by holder type.

Related Audits

6 more on the recordAll audits
HOMEBase52MediumDegenBase52MediumGyndoreGYND · Base52MediumHIVEBase52MediumVenice TokenVVV · Base51MediumAUTONOMOPOLYAUTONO · Base53Medium

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of CTR?

Our AI-powered scanner gives you a deeper, real-time smart contract analysis — free, with every scoring factor shown.

Get Detailed Audit Is this your token? Publish your own audit on this page