Quantum Audit Logo

Is Microsoft Corporation Safe?

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

Microsoft Corporation MSFTC
0xb200…872b
Base
Not verifiedThis 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.
Last checked 5d ago 1 audit on record
DexScreener ↗
How is this score calculated? → Medium Risk
Executive SummaryAI Copilot

This report details a security audit for the contract at 0xb200000000000000000000ab99cfa739e253872b on the Base network. No contract source code was provided for analysis, therefore a comprehensive security assessment could not be performed. The findings reflect the inability to conduct a full review.

3 Informational
Volume 24h
$2.52M
Liquidity
$892.5K
Price
$494.5300
Token Age
1y
Top 10 Holders
0.0%

Security Findings

3 Info
Info

No Source Code Provided for Audit

I-01The audit was initiated without access to the contract's source code. This prevents any form of static analysis, dynamic testing, or manual review of the contract's logic and security posture. Consequently, no specific vulnerabilities could be identified or confirmed.
IssueThe audit was initiated without access to the contract's source code. This prevents any form of static analysis, dynamic testing, or manual review of the contract's logic and security posture. Consequently, no specific vulnerabilities could be identified or confirmed.
FixProvide the complete and verified Solidity source code for the contract to enable a thorough security audit. Ensure the provided code matches the deployed bytecode.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Inability to Assess Technical Risks

I-02Without source code, a detailed technical risk assessment covering architecture (7.1), code security (7.2), and access control (7.3) is impossible. This means common vulnerabilities like reentrancy, integer overflows, front-running, or critical access control flaws cannot be detected.
IssueWithout source code, a detailed technical risk assessment covering architecture (7.1), code security (7.2), and access control (7.3) is impossible. This means common vulnerabilities like reentrancy, integer overflows, front-running, or critical access control flaws cannot be detected.
FixSubmit the contract's source code for a full technical review. This will allow for identification and remediation of potential technical vulnerabilities before deployment or further interaction.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Inability to Assess Economic, Governance, and Upgrade Risks

I-03The absence of source code prevents the evaluation of economic models (7.4), governance mechanisms (7.5), and upgradeability (7.7). Critical aspects such as tokenomics, administrative privileges, potential oracle manipulation, or upgrade path safety cannot be analyzed, leaving significant areas of risk unaddressed.
IssueThe absence of source code prevents the evaluation of economic models (7.4), governance mechanisms (7.5), and upgradeability (7.7). Critical aspects such as tokenomics, administrative privileges, potential oracle manipulation, or upgrade path safety cannot be analyzed, leaving significant areas of risk unaddressed.
FixProvide the source code to allow for a comprehensive assessment of economic, governance, and upgrade-related risks. This includes understanding external dependencies (7.6) and operational procedures (7.8).
StatusUnresolved

Category Ratings

TechnicalMedium6/10

No contract source code was provided for technical analysis. Therefore, a comprehensive assessment of code security (7.2), access control mechanisms (7.3), and overall architecture (7.1) could not be performed. Without code, potential vulnerabilities such as reentrancy, integer overflows, or logic errors cannot be identified. A full technical review requires access to the complete and verified source code.

GovernanceHigh3/10

Without access to the contract's source code, an evaluation of its economic model (7.4) and governance mechanisms (7.5) is not possible. Key aspects like tokenomics, fee structures, or administrative control over critical parameters cannot be assessed. This limits the ability to identify potential economic exploits or governance centralization risks.

UpgradesMedium5/10

The upgradeability status (7.7) of the contract could not be determined without source code. It is unknown if the contract employs a proxy pattern (e.g., UUPS, Transparent) or is immutable. This prevents an assessment of upgrade safety, potential upgrade path risks, or the impact of future changes on the protocol's security and operations (7.8).

Security Checklist

1/5 checks passed
Contract VerifiedFail
Ownership Renounced?
No Mint Function?
Liquidity LockedFail
Not a ProxyPass

Liquidity Depth

$907.5K across 5 pairs
AerodromeUSDCanalysed$892.5K98.3%Uniswap v3USDC$12.1K1.3%Uniswap v4ETH$2.8K0.3%Uniswap v4USDC$1000.0%EqualizerUSDC$200.0%

The risk score reads depth across every pair. The volume figure and the volume-to-liquidity ratio elsewhere on this page describe only the pair this audit analysed, so the two are not directly comparable.

What Raised This Score

4 factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN (implementation ABI unreadable)
  • Contract source NOT verified
  • Liquidity NOT locked (owner can withdraw — rug-pull risk)

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

Related Audits

6 more on the record
Jerry the goat (JERRY)Medium RiskHunter Biden's Laptop (LAPTOP)Medium RiskSandisk Corporation (SNDKC)Medium RiskTesla Inc. (TSLAC)Medium RiskBitVault Signal (BV7X)Medium RiskCoinbase Man (BRIAN)Medium Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Microsoft Corporation?

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

Get Detailed Audit