Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

Early-stage security check — honeypot & rug-pull analysis

Is Nous Research a Scam?

NOUSArbitrum
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 Oct 16, 2026 · 1 audit on recordNew Launch · 23h old
Chart
High RiskHow is this score calculated?
How the score breaks downratings: 10 is safest
Technical6/10Governance1/10Upgrades6/10Checks passed3 of 7Findings1 Medium · 8 Info9
SummaryAI Copilot

This audit report is based on the provided contract address 0x4a11cad576db0798e515f8bf785cbda5c682feda on the Arbitrum network.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN
  • Liquidity not locked
  • Top-10 concentration > 70%
  • Contract source not verified — its logic cannot be read
Exact factors
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN (implementation ABI unreadable)
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Liquidity NOT locked (100% of the pool) — held by independent providers — market-depth risk
  • Top-10 concentration > 70% (93.7% total → 93.7% effective; 93.7% in EOAs, 0.0% in contracts)
  • 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

Early-stage analysis. This token has limited on-chain history (23h old). New tokens carry elevated risk — data may change rapidly. Always verify independently before investing.

Security Checklist

as of audit · Oct 163 of 7 checks passed
Contract verifiedNot verified
OwnershipUnknown
MintUnknown
Liquidity lockNot locked
UpgradeabilityFixed code
HoneypotNone found
Buy / sell tax0% / 0%

Holders

as of audit · Oct 16, 2026415 holders
93.7%Wallets6.3%
93.7%Wallets6.3%
WalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
93.7%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell93.7%
  • Everyone else405 holders6.3%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads93.7%
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 16, 2026

Liquidity

as of audit · Oct 16$78.4K

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$78.4KShare of depth100.0%
Top-1 Unlocked Holder99.8%
Top-3 Unlocked100.0%
Unlocked LP held by
0xf67e…e6250x1d2a…158c

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

Security Findings

1 Medium8 Info
Medium

Liquidity not locked

0.0% of the pool's LP is burned or time-locked. 100.0% is held, unlocked, by 2 address(es) other than the owner/deployer. One of them — a wallet, 0xf67e…e625 — holds 99.8% and can remove that share at once; who controls it is not visible on-chain, so it is not treated as an independent provider.QA-LIQUIDITY

Issue

0.0% of the pool's LP is burned or time-locked. 100.0% is held, unlocked, by 2 address(es) other than the owner/deployer. One of them — a wallet, 0xf67e…e625 — holds 99.8% and can remove that share at once; who controls it is not visible on-chain, so it is not treated as an independent provider.

Fix

Check the lock's end date and beneficiary on the locker's own page before relying on it.

Status

Acknowledged

Info

Missing Source Code for Comprehensive Audit

The source code for the contract at 0x4a11…feda was not provided for this audit. This prevents a thorough analysis of the contract's logic, architecture, and potential vulnerabilities. Without source code, it is impossible to identify issues such as reentrancy, access control flaws, integer overflows, or other critical security risks.I-01

Issue

The source code for the contract at was not provided for this audit. This prevents a thorough analysis of the contract's logic, architecture, and potential vulnerabilities. Without source code, it is impossible to identify issues such as reentrancy, access control flaws, integer overflows, or other critical security risks.

Fix

Always provide the full, verified source code for any contract intended for audit. Public verification on block explorers (e.g., Etherscan) is a crucial step for transparency and user trust. Without source code, users should treat the contract as high-risk.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Unverified Contract on Block Explorer

The contract at 0x4a11…feda is not verified on the Arbitrum block explorer. This lack of verification means that the deployed bytecode cannot be easily matched against human-readable source code, making it difficult for users and auditors to understand its functionality and verify its integrity. This significantly increases the trust assumption required from users.I-02

Issue

The contract at is not verified on the Arbitrum block explorer. This lack of verification means that the deployed bytecode cannot be easily matched against human-readable source code, making it difficult for users and auditors to understand its functionality and verify its integrity. This significantly increases the trust assumption required from users.

Fix

It is a best practice to always verify contract source code on block explorers. This provides transparency, allows users to inspect the code, and facilitates community and auditor review. Projects should prioritize verification for all deployed contracts.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Unknown Security Posture and Operational Risks

Due to the absence of source code, the overall security posture, including potential operational risks (7.8 Operations), governance mechanisms (7.5 Governance), and economic implications (7.4 Economic), remains entirely unknown. This includes whether the contract has an owner, upgrade capabilities, or any privileged roles that could be exploited. The lack of transparency makes it impossible to assess the safety of interacting with this contract.I-03

Issue

Due to the absence of source code, the overall security posture, including potential operational risks (7.8 Operations), governance mechanisms (7.5 Governance), and economic implications (7.4 Economic), remains entirely unknown. This includes whether the contract has an owner, upgrade capabilities, or any privileged roles that could be exploited. The lack of transparency makes it impossible to assess the safety of interacting with this contract.

Fix

Projects should provide comprehensive documentation, including architectural diagrams, threat models, and details on operational procedures and access control mechanisms. A full audit with source code is essential to establish a known security posture and mitigate operational risks.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Who holds the supply

The ten largest holders own 93.7% of supply. What remains: 93.7% in wallets, 0.0% in other contracts. The deployer/owner wallet itself holds 2.4%. 415 holders in total.QA-HOLDERS

Issue

The ten largest holders own 93.7% of supply. What remains: 93.7% in wallets, 0.0% in other contracts. The deployer/owner wallet itself holds 2.4%. 415 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

Info

Not listed by any independent source

415 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

415 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

Info

The market for this token

Liquidity $78K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $133K (DexScreener, all pools).QA-MARKET

Issue

Liquidity $78K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $133K (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

Info

Asset 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: mint capability could not be read. Control: an owner that could not be resolved. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $78K 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: mint capability could not be read. Control: an owner that could not be resolved. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $78K 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

Info

Recently 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 16
Executive SummaryWhat the contract is and what the review found

This audit report is based on the provided contract address 0x4a11cad576db0798e515f8bf785cbda5c682feda on the Arbitrum network. Crucially, the source code for this contract was not provided, which severely limits the scope and depth of this security assessment. Without the source code, a comprehensive analysis of potential vulnerabilities, architectural design, and adherence to security best practices cannot be performed. The contract is also unverified on Etherscan, further increasing the risk due to lack of transparency.

Technical6/10Medium risk

A technical security assessment (7.1 Architecture, 7.2 Code Security, 7.3 Access Control) could not be performed due to the absence of the contract's source code. This prevents analysis of implementation details, potential reentrancy, integer overflows, or other code-level vulnerabilities. The lack of visibility into the contract's logic represents a significant technical risk.

Governance1/10High risk

An evaluation of economic models (7.4 Economic) and governance mechanisms (7.5 Governance) was not possible without access to the contract's source code. This prevents understanding tokenomics, fee structures, or administrative control, which could lead to unforeseen economic exploits or centralized control risks. External dependencies (7.6 External) also remain unknown.

Upgrades6/10Medium risk

The upgradeability status (7.7 Upgrades) of the contract could not be determined without source code. It is unknown if the contract is part of a proxy pattern, if it has mutable logic, or if there are any upgrade mechanisms in place. This introduces a high risk regarding future changes and potential rug pulls or malicious upgrades. Operational aspects (7.8 Operations) are also unassessable.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

It is strongly recommended that users exercise extreme caution when interacting with unverified and unaudited smart contracts.

For any future deployments, ensure that the full source code is publicly verified on block explorers and undergoes a thorough security audit by reputable firms. Implement robust testing, consider formal verification, and establish clear operational procedures for contract management.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
Type-
NetworkArbitrum
Token age23h
Contract0x4a11…feda
Deployer0x97fd…6ee2
Audit History
  1. Oct 16, 202675High

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

Related Audits

6 more on the recordAll audits
Entendre FinanceENDFI · Arbitrum75HighCoinbase Wrapped BTCCBBTC · Arbitrum74HighAgentumAGT · Arbitrum76HighInfiniIFN · Arbitrum74HighEuniceEUIAI · Arbitrum74HighVangridVAGRD · Arbitrum76High

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Nous Research?

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