The DERC20 contract is a standard ERC-20 implementation with additional governance and vesting capabilities. The protocol relies on a centralized owner to manage inflation rates and pool access. While the code follows standard OpenZeppelin patterns, the high degree of administrative control over token supply and transferability presents a significant centralization risk.
Early-stage security check — honeypot & rug-pull analysis
Is NODF a Scam?
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 →The DERC20 contract is a standard ERC-20 implementation with additional governance and vesting capabilities.
Read the full analysis- A privileged address controls a switch that decides whether transfers go through
- Mintable supply — no cap found, dilution unbounded
- LP lock status UNKNOWN — the pool's LP could not be read
- Volume/Liquidity > 10×
- Top-10 concentration > 30%
- Contract source not verified — its logic cannot be read
Exact factors
- A privileged address controls a switch that decides whether transfers go through
- Mintable supply — no cap found, dilution unbounded
- LP lock status UNKNOWN — the pool's LP could not be read
- Volume/Liquidity > 10× (12.3× — possible wash trading)
- Top-10 concentration > 30% (100.0% total → 48.2% effective; 16.2% in EOAs, 80.0% in contracts; 3.8% burned, locked or in pools excluded)
- Contract source NOT verified — its logic cannot be read
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 · Oct 22Holders
as of audit · Oct 22, 2026- Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking80.0%
- Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell16.2%
- Burnedout of circulation3.8%
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 Oct 22, 2026
Liquidity
as of audit · Oct 22The risk score reads depth across every pair.
Whether the LP tokens are locked could not be determined.
Security Findings
MediumCentralized Control Over Token Supply
The owner can call updateMintRate and release to increase the total supply of tokens. This allows the owner to dilute existing token holders at their discretion within the defined annual limits.CP-01
Issue
The owner can call updateMintRate and release to increase the total supply of tokens. This allows the owner to dilute existing token holders at their discretion within the defined annual limits.
Fix
Transition ownership to a decentralized governance model or implement a timelock on all minting-related functions to ensure transparency and community oversight.
Status
Unresolved
MediumCentralized Control Over Transferability
The owner has the authority to lock or unlock the pool via lockPool and unlockPool. This effectively allows the owner to halt all transfers or sales of the token, creating a significant centralization risk for liquidity providers and users.CP-05
Issue
The owner has the authority to lock or unlock the pool via lockPool and unlockPool. This effectively allows the owner to halt all transfers or sales of the token, creating a significant centralization risk for liquidity providers and users.
Fix
Remove the ability for the owner to arbitrarily lock transfers, or restrict this functionality to a time-bound emergency pause mechanism governed by a multi-signature or DAO.
Status
Unresolved
InfoWho holds the supply
The ten largest holders own 100.0% of supply. Of that, 3.8% burned — not holders that can sell, so excluded from the concentration score. What remains: 16.2% in wallets, 80.0% in other contracts. The deployer/owner wallet itself holds 16.2%. 6,042 holders in total.QA-HOLDERS
Issue
The ten largest holders own 100.0% of supply. Of that, 3.8% burned — not holders that can sell, so excluded from the concentration score. What remains: 16.2% in wallets, 80.0% in other contracts. The deployer/owner wallet itself holds 16.2%. 6,042 holders in total.
Fix
Watch the largest wallets that are not exchanges, pools or locks — those are the ones that can move the price.
Status
Acknowledged
InfoNot listed by any independent source
6,042 holders. Not listed by CoinGecko or any exchange GoPlus tracks. Nothing independent confirms who is behind this token, so every power its contract grants is scored at face value.QA-IDENTITY
Issue
6,042 holders. Not listed by CoinGecko or any exchange GoPlus tracks. Nothing independent confirms who is behind this token, so every power its contract grants is scored at face value.
Fix
Match the contract address against the project's official channels before trading.
Status
Acknowledged
InfoThe market for this token
Liquidity $177K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $2.2M (DexScreener, all pools).QA-MARKET
Issue
Liquidity $177K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $2.2M (DexScreener, all pools).
Fix
Size any position to the liquidity and daily volume shown — they set how much you can sell and at what price.
Status
Acknowledged
InfoAsset class: Project token
A token issued by a project for use, governance or fundraising. Scored on its contract and market facts. The class itself adds no points; the contract and market facts decide the score. Basis: no class-specific evidence. Tokenomics — Supply: mintable with no on-chain cap found. Control: a ProxyAdmin contract. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $177K of DEX liquidity across 1 pools. Launch: under a day of market history.QA-PROFILE
Issue
A token issued by a project for use, governance or fundraising. Scored on its contract and market facts. The class itself adds no points; the contract and market facts decide the score. Basis: no class-specific evidence. Tokenomics — Supply: mintable with no on-chain cap found. Control: a ProxyAdmin contract. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $177K of DEX liquidity across 1 pools. Launch: under a day of market history.
Fix
Check the project's own documentation for what the token is used for; this report covers what the contract allows.
Status
Acknowledged
InfoRecently launched — less than a day of market history
The token's oldest DEX pool is less than a day old. Age is not part of the risk score — a new token is not a risky one by default — but a short history means fewer trades and holder changes behind the facts in this report.QA-RECENT
Issue
The token's oldest DEX pool is less than a day old. Age is not part of the risk score — a new token is not a risky one by default — but a short history means fewer trades and holder changes behind the facts in this report.
Fix
Re-check ownership, liquidity and holder distribution as the token matures; those are the facts that move early.
Status
Acknowledged
Analysis
AI Copilotas of audit · Oct 22The contract utilizes well-audited OpenZeppelin libraries for ERC-20 and governance features. 7.1 Architecture is modular, and 7.2 Code Security is high due to the use of standard, battle-tested primitives. 7.3 Access Control is strictly enforced via Ownable, though the scope of administrative power is broad. 7.8 Operations are straightforward, with clear separation between minting and vesting logic.
7.4 Economic and 7.5 Governance aspects are heavily centralized under the contract owner. The owner has the ability to mint tokens up to a 2% annual cap and manipulate transferability via the pool lock mechanism. These powers allow for significant influence over token liquidity and holder value, which may be a concern for decentralized governance participants.
7.7 Upgrades are not supported as the contract is not a proxy. The logic is immutable, providing transparency to users regarding the current rules. No upgrade risk exists for this specific deployment.
To improve security and trust, consider transitioning ownership to a multi-signature wallet or a decentralized DAO governance contract.
This would mitigate the risk of a single point of failure regarding the minting and pool-locking functions.
Additionally, implement a timelock mechanism for all privileged functions. A delay of 24-48 hours on administrative actions like updateMintRate or lockPool would provide users with sufficient notice and the ability to react to changes in the protocol's economic parameters.
Contract & Record
Free for any token on the record. It links to this page and always shows the current score and the date it was checked.
- Oct 22, 202677High
Score changes are recorded as dated snapshots — history is append-only and cannot be edited.
Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of NODF?
This token is brand new. Run a deeper AI-powered analysis of the contract code — free and instant.
Get Detailed Audit Is this your token? Publish your own audit on this page