Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

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

Is Flower Safe?

FLOWERBase
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
SummaryAI Copilot

The FlowerOFT contract implements an ERC-20 token with Pausable and ERC-1363 extensions, leveraging LayerZero v2 for omnichain functionality.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Ownership not renounced — Multisig
  • Top-10 concentration > 30%
  • Liquidity not locked
  • 1 Medium finding(s) from audit
Exact factors
  • Ownership NOT renounced — Multisig (2-of-5)
  • Top-10 concentration > 30% (91.4% total → 38.2% effective; 2.8% in EOAs, 88.6% in contracts — moderate)
  • Liquidity NOT locked (owner can withdraw — rug-pull risk)
  • 1 Medium 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
88.6%Contracts2.8%8.6%
88.6%Contracts8.6%
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
91.4%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking88.6%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell2.8%
  • Everyone elsethe rest of the supply8.6%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads38.2%
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$289.3K across 10 pairs
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$283.7KShare of depth98.1%
Top-1 Unlocked Holder37.1%
Top-3 Unlocked55.1%
Unlocked LP held by
0x1aa8…aab20x4698…92ed0x7243…73170xe8db…d38d0x873e…6f690x67e4…26160x2cdd…284b0xb141…178d0x0e4b…7e600x734a…a381

A privileged address — the deployer, the owner, or the token contract itself — is among these holders, so that party can withdraw liquidity.

Security Findings

1 Medium3 Info
Medium

Centralized Control by Owner

The Ownable owner has significant control over the contract, specifically the ability to pause and unpause all token transfers. While the prefill indicates the owner is a multisig (2/5 threshold), this still represents a central point of control. If the multisig keys are compromised, or if the signers collude or act maliciously, it could lead to a denial of service for token holders or other adverse actions.M-01

Issue

The Ownable owner has significant control over the contract, specifically the ability to pause and unpause all token transfers. While the prefill indicates the owner is a multisig (2/5 threshold), this still represents a central point of control. If the multisig keys are compromised, or if the signers collude or act maliciously, it could lead to a denial of service for token holders or other adverse actions.

Fix

Ensure robust security practices for the multisig, including strong key management, secure operational procedures, and regular audits of multisig members. For critical operations like pausing, consider implementing a time-lock to provide a delay before execution, allowing users to react and increasing transparency. Explore options for more decentralized governance if the project's roadmap allows.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Dependency on LayerZero v2 Security

The FlowerOFT contract heavily relies on the security and correct functioning of the LayerZero v2 protocol and its endpoint for its omnichain capabilities (7.6 External). Any vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, or operational issues within the LayerZero infrastructure could directly impact the cross-chain functionality, integrity, and availability of the FlowerOFT token.I-01

Issue

The FlowerOFT contract heavily relies on the security and correct functioning of the LayerZero v2 protocol and its endpoint for its omnichain capabilities (7.6 External). Any vulnerabilities, misconfigurations, or operational issues within the LayerZero infrastructure could directly impact the cross-chain functionality, integrity, and availability of the FlowerOFT token.

Fix

Maintain continuous monitoring of LayerZero security announcements, updates, and best practices. Ensure the _lzEndpoint address configured in the constructor is the official and trusted LayerZero endpoint for the respective network. Understand the implications of LayerZero's security model and its impact on the token's overall risk profile.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Immutability and Lack of Upgradeability

The contract is not designed with an upgradeability mechanism (e.g., proxy pattern), as confirmed by the is_proxy: false status (7.7 Upgrades). While this reduces complexity and eliminates certain upgrade-related risks, it means that any discovered critical vulnerabilities or desired feature enhancements would necessitate a new contract deployment and a potentially complex migration process for existing token holders and integrated protocols.I-02

Issue

The contract is not designed with an upgradeability mechanism (e.g., proxy pattern), as confirmed by the is_proxy: false status (7.7 Upgrades). While this reduces complexity and eliminates certain upgrade-related risks, it means that any discovered critical vulnerabilities or desired feature enhancements would necessitate a new contract deployment and a potentially complex migration process for existing token holders and integrated protocols.

Fix

Acknowledge the implications of immutability. For future projects or if long-term flexibility, bug fixes, or feature additions are anticipated, consider implementing an upgradeable proxy pattern (e.g., UUPS) from the outset. For the current contract, ensure thorough testing and auditing before deployment to minimize the chance of needing a redeployment.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Pausable Mechanism Impact

The Pausable mechanism allows the onlyOwner to halt all token transfers by calling pause() (7.3 Access Control). While intended for emergency situations like critical bug discovery or exploit mitigation, it introduces a single point of failure for token utility. If the owner account is compromised or acts maliciously, it could lead to a denial of service for all token holders.I-03

Issue

The Pausable mechanism allows the onlyOwner to halt all token transfers by calling pause() (7.3 Access Control). While intended for emergency situations like critical bug discovery or exploit mitigation, it introduces a single point of failure for token utility. If the owner account is compromised or acts maliciously, it could lead to a denial of service for all token holders.

Fix

Clearly communicate the purpose and conditions under which the pause function would be used to the community. Consider adding a time-lock for the pause() and unpause() functions, or requiring a multi-party decision mechanism for unpausing in future versions, to further decentralize control and provide transparency.

Status

Unresolved

Analysis

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

The FlowerOFT contract implements an ERC-20 token with Pausable and ERC-1363 extensions, leveraging LayerZero v2 for omnichain functionality. The contract is well-structured, inheriting from established OpenZeppelin and LayerZero libraries. Key controls, such as pausing transfers, are managed by a single owner address, which is a multisig, mitigating some centralization risks.

Technical10/10Low risk

The technical architecture (7.1) is sound, utilizing battle-tested OpenZeppelin and LayerZero libraries for core ERC-20, pausable, and omnichain functionalities. Code security (7.2) benefits from Solidity 0.8.20 and standard patterns, with the _update function correctly integrating the whenNotPaused modifier. However, the contract's reliance on the LayerZero v2 protocol means its cross-chain security is directly tied to the underlying LayerZero infrastructure (7.6 External), which introduces an external dependency risk.

Governance4/10Medium risk

Access control (7.3) is primarily managed by the Ownable pattern, granting the owner the ability to pause and unpause token transfers. The prefill indicates the owner is a multisig with a 2/5 threshold, which significantly enhances security and decentralization compared to an EOA. Economically (7.4), the token's value and stability are dependent on its utility and the LayerZero bridging mechanism. The centralized pause function (7.5 Governance) represents a potential point of control that could impact token utility if misused.

Upgrades6/10Medium risk

The FlowerOFT contract is deployed as an immutable contract, as confirmed by the is_proxy: false status (7.7 Upgrades). This design choice eliminates risks associated with upgrade mechanisms, such as proxy storage collisions or faulty upgrade logic. However, it also means that any future bug fixes or feature enhancements would necessitate a new contract deployment and a token migration process, which can be complex for users.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

Ensure the multisig controlling the Ownable address is managed with the highest security standards, including robust key management, clear operational procedures, and regular audits of its members.

For future iterations, consider implementing a time-lock for critical administrative actions like pausing/unpausing to provide a grace period for users and further decentralize control. Thoroughly monitor LayerZero security announcements and best practices to maintain the integrity of the omnichain functionality.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
TypeToken
NetworkBase
Token age1y
Contract0x3e12…b380
Deployer0x68a9…8e92
Badge for your website
Flower 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. Aug 11, 202633Low

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

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the FLOWER contract address?

The Flower contract on Base is 0x3e12b9d6a4d12cd9b4a6d613872d0eb32f68b380. Compare it with the address the project itself publishes before trading: other contracts can carry the same name and ticker.

Is Flower a scam?

Quantum Audit's risk score for Flower is 33/100 (Low 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 FLOWER liquidity locked?

Liquidity lock: Not locked (as of Sep 4, 2026). Total DEX liquidity: $289.3K.

Who holds FLOWER?

As of Sep 4, 2026, the 10 largest holders own 91.4% of the supply. The Holders section on this page shows who they are by holder type.

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Flower?

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