Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

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

Is Manyu Safe?

MANYUEthereum
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
Low RiskHow is this score calculated?
How the score breaks downratings: 10 is safest
Technical5/10Governance6/10Upgrades9/10Checks passed5 of 5Findings1 Critical · 3 High · 1 Info5
SummaryAI Copilot

This audit was conducted on an incomplete set of Solidity source code.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • 1 Critical finding(s) from audit
  • 3 High finding(s) from audit
Exact factors
  • 1 Critical finding(s) from audit
  • 3 High 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 45 of 5 checks passed
Contract verifiedVerified
OwnershipRenounced
MintNo mint
Liquidity lockLocked
UpgradeabilityFixed code

Holders

as of audit · Sep 4, 2026
9.7%Contracts12.6%Wallets77.7%Everyone else
9.7%12.6%Wallets77.7%Everyone else
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
22.3%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking9.7%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell12.6%
  • Everyone elsethe rest of the supply77.7%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads16.5%
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$634.6K across 4 pairs

The risk score reads depth across every pair.

LP tokensLocked

The LP tokens of the analysed pool are locked or burned.

Analysed pool$606.7KShare of depth95.6%
LP Burned100.0% · ≈ permanent lock
LP Locked100.0% · Null Address
Unlocked LP held by
0xc1f2…a6d30x1502…8bba0xa0ac…8e830x2bf8…bd2f0x1f2f…f3870x6a21…96710x9b02…8ad2

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

Security Findings

1 Critical3 High1 Info
Critical

Missing Core Contract Source Code

The provided source code only includes the SafeMath library and IERC20 interface. The main contract implementation (e.g., the 'Manyu' token contract) is entirely missing. This prevents any meaningful security analysis of the deployed contract's logic, state variables, functions, and interactions, making a comprehensive audit impossible.C-01

Issue

The provided source code only includes the SafeMath library and IERC20 interface. The main contract implementation (e.g., the 'Manyu' token contract) is entirely missing. This prevents any meaningful security analysis of the deployed contract's logic, state variables, functions, and interactions, making a comprehensive audit impossible.

Fix

Provide the complete and verified source code for the deployed contract () to allow for a comprehensive security audit. Without this, users cannot independently verify the contract's behavior or security, leading to a critical trust deficit.

Status

Unresolved

High

Inability to Assess Access Control Mechanisms

Without the full source code, it is impossible to evaluate the contract's access control mechanisms. This includes identifying privileged roles (e.g., owner, admin), verifying proper authorization checks (e.g., onlyOwner), and assessing potential centralization risks or single points of failure (7.3 Access Control). This lack of visibility poses a high risk of unauthorized actions or control.H-01

Issue

Without the full source code, it is impossible to evaluate the contract's access control mechanisms. This includes identifying privileged roles (e.g., owner, admin), verifying proper authorization checks (e.g., onlyOwner), and assessing potential centralization risks or single points of failure (7.3 Access Control). This lack of visibility poses a high risk of unauthorized actions or control.

Fix

Provide the complete source code to allow for a thorough review of all access control implementations and ensure they align with security best practices and the project's stated decentralization goals.

Status

Unresolved

High

Inability to Assess Economic Model and Tokenomics

The absence of the main contract's source code prevents any analysis of the token's economic model, including supply mechanisms, minting/burning functions, fee structures, staking rewards, or other tokenomics features (7.4 Economic). This leaves potential vulnerabilities like uncontrolled inflation, deflationary spirals, or rug pull vectors unidentifiable, posing a high risk to token holders.H-02

Issue

The absence of the main contract's source code prevents any analysis of the token's economic model, including supply mechanisms, minting/burning functions, fee structures, staking rewards, or other tokenomics features (7.4 Economic). This leaves potential vulnerabilities like uncontrolled inflation, deflationary spirals, or rug pull vectors unidentifiable, posing a high risk to token holders.

Fix

Submit the full contract source code for review to enable a comprehensive assessment of the economic model, ensuring its stability, fairness, and resistance to manipulation.

Status

Unresolved

High

Inability to Assess Upgradeability and Operational Risks

The provided code does not reveal any upgradeability patterns or operational controls. Consequently, it's impossible to determine if the contract is upgradeable, how upgrades are managed, or if emergency functions (e.g., pause, emergency withdrawal) exist and are properly secured (7.7 Upgrades, 7.8 Operations). This introduces significant unknown risks regarding future changes and emergency response capabilities.H-03

Issue

The provided code does not reveal any upgradeability patterns or operational controls. Consequently, it's impossible to determine if the contract is upgradeable, how upgrades are managed, or if emergency functions (e.g., pause, emergency withdrawal) exist and are properly secured (7.7 Upgrades, 7.8 Operations). This introduces significant unknown risks regarding future changes and emergency response capabilities.

Fix

Provide the complete source code to allow for an assessment of any upgradeability patterns (e.g., proxy implementations) and operational controls, ensuring they are robust, transparent, and secure.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Redundant SafeMath Usage in Solidity 0.8.x

The contract uses a SafeMath library. While SafeMath is crucial for preventing integer overflow/underflow in Solidity versions prior to 0.8.0, Solidity 0.8.0 and later versions (like 0.8.19 used here) include built-in overflow and underflow checks by default for all arithmetic operations. The add, sub, mul, div, mod functions in the provided SafeMath library that do not take an errorMessage parameter are effectively redundant as they simply wrap native operators that already revert on overflow/underflow. The try* functions and those with errorMessage parameters correctly use unchecked blocks and require statements, respectively.I-01

Issue

The contract uses a SafeMath library. While SafeMath is crucial for preventing integer overflow/underflow in Solidity versions prior to 0.8.0, Solidity 0.8.0 and later versions (like 0.8.19 used here) include built-in overflow and underflow checks by default for all arithmetic operations. The add, sub, mul, div, mod functions in the provided SafeMath library that do not take an errorMessage parameter are effectively redundant as they simply wrap native operators that already revert on overflow/underflow. The try* functions and those with errorMessage parameters correctly use unchecked blocks and require statements, respectively.

Fix

Consider removing the SafeMath library for basic arithmetic operations in Solidity 0.8.x and above, relying on the native overflow/underflow checks. If custom error messages or explicit unchecked blocks are desired, ensure they are used judiciously where gas optimization is critical and safety is guaranteed by other means.

Status

Unresolved

Analysis

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

This audit was conducted on an incomplete set of Solidity source code. Only the SafeMath library and IERC20 interface were provided. The core contract logic, identified as 'Manyu' in prefill data, is missing. Therefore, a comprehensive security assessment of the protocol's functionality, economic model, and access control mechanisms could not be performed. The overall risk is assessed as Critical due to this significant lack of information, as the actual deployed contract's behavior and security posture remain largely unknown.

Technical5/10Medium risk

The provided source code consists only of a SafeMath library and an IERC20 interface. The SafeMath library is a standard, well-tested component, correctly implementing arithmetic operations with overflow/underflow checks or unchecked blocks where appropriate (7.2 Code Security). However, the absence of the main contract's implementation (e.g., the 'Manyu' token contract) prevents any assessment of its architecture, specific vulnerabilities, or adherence to best practices (7.1 Architecture). Crucially, the contract's access control mechanisms (7.3 Access Control) cannot be evaluated, leaving potential centralization risks unknown. Therefore, the technical security of the actual deployed contract remains largely unknown.

Governance6/10Medium risk

Without the main contract's source code, it is impossible to assess any economic model, tokenomics, fee structures, or governance mechanisms (7.4 Economic, 7.5 Governance). This means potential risks related to inflation, deflation, rug pulls, or centralized control cannot be identified. Furthermore, any external interactions or dependencies (7.6 External) are also unknown, posing significant unquantifiable risks to the protocol's stability and user funds. The lack of visibility into these critical areas prevents a comprehensive economic and governance risk assessment.

Upgrades9/10Low risk

The provided code does not include any proxy or upgradeable contract patterns, nor does it reveal operational controls. Consequently, it is impossible to determine if the contract is upgradeable, what upgrade mechanisms are in place, or what risks might be associated with potential upgrades (7.7 Upgrades). Similarly, the operational aspects (7.8 Operations) such as pause functions, emergency shutdowns, or administrative privileges are entirely unknown. This introduces significant unquantifiable risks regarding future changes, emergency response capabilities, and the overall long-term maintainability of the contract.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

It is critical to provide the complete and verified source code for the deployed contract to enable a thorough security audit.

Without the full source, no meaningful assessment of the contract's security posture can be made, and the project carries severe unquantifiable risks. Deploying contracts without publicly verified and audited source code introduces severe trust and security risks for users. It is strongly recommended to verify the full source code on block explorers and engage in a comprehensive audit to ensure the safety and integrity of the protocol.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
TypeToken
NetworkEthereum
Token age1y
Contract0x95af…24ce
Deployer0x6981…a6ae
Badge for your website
Manyu 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, 202613Low
  2. Jul 24, 202615Low

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

Related Audits

6 more on the recordAll audits
RektEthereum13LowXEN CryptoXEN · Ethereum13LowWrapped liquid staked Ether 2.0WSTETH · Ethereum12LowEthereumcatETHCAT · Ethereum14LowA Hunters DreamCAW · Ethereum12LowTetherUSDT · Ethereum12Low

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Manyu?

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