Quantum Audit Logo

Is Orthogonal a Scam?

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

Orthogonal ORGOL
0xfe67…f6b3
Arbitrum
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 New Launch · 1d old
DexScreener ↗
How is this score calculated? → High Risk
Executive SummaryAI Copilot

This report is based on a security audit of the contract at 0xfe67d6f5adbacf718f7ce0328a8c7e43bba5f6b3. No source code was provided for analysis, therefore a comprehensive security assessment could not be performed. The risk levels and findings reflect the absence of code rather than an actual analysis of the contract's logic.

1 Informational
! Early-stage analysis. This token has limited on-chain history (1d old). New tokens carry elevated risk — data may change rapidly. Always verify independently before investing.
Volume 24h
$156.0K
Liquidity
$105.5K
Price
$0.02453
Token Age
1d
Top 10 Holders
81.9%

Security Findings

1 Info
Info

No code-level findings — contract source is not verified on the explorer

I-01The contract's source code has not been published or verified on the block explorer, so only its deployed bytecode and on-chain behaviour were available. No source-level vulnerability could be confirmed or ruled out. The assessment on this page rests on LP lock/burn state, holder concentration.
IssueThe contract's source code has not been published or verified on the block explorer, so only its deployed bytecode and on-chain behaviour were available. No source-level vulnerability could be confirmed or ruled out. The assessment on this page rests on LP lock/burn state, holder concentration.
FixTreat an unverified contract as unaudited at the code level. Ask the team to verify the source on the explorer, which makes an independent review possible.
StatusAcknowledged

Category Ratings

TechnicalMedium6/10

Due to the absence of source code, a technical risk assessment (7.1 Architecture, 7.2 Code Security, 7.3 Access Control) could not be conducted. No specific vulnerabilities related to reentrancy, integer overflows, or access control flaws can be identified without code. The technical risk is marked as Low only because no issues could be identified from an empty codebase.

GovernanceHigh1/10

Without source code, an assessment of economic (7.4 Economic) and governance (7.5 Governance) risks is not possible. Potential issues like oracle manipulation, flash loan vulnerabilities, or centralized control mechanisms cannot be evaluated. The economic and governance risk is marked as Low only because no issues could be identified from an empty codebase.

UpgradesMedium6/10

The upgradeability (7.7 Upgrades) and operational (7.8 Operations) aspects of the contract cannot be determined without source code. It is unknown if the contract uses a proxy pattern, has upgrade mechanisms, or if operational controls are properly implemented. The upgrade risk is marked as Low only because no issues could be identified from an empty codebase.

Security Checklist

2/5 checks passed
Contract VerifiedFail
Ownership Renounced?
No Mint Function?
Liquidity LockedPass
Not a ProxyPass
HoneypotNoneBuy Tax0.0%Sell Tax0.0%

Holder Composition

81.9% in top 10
48.7% in wallets33.2% in contracts
Effective Concentration62.0%

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.

Liquidity Depth

$105.5K

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.

LP Distribution

Top-1 Unlocked Holder99.8%
Top-3 Unlocked100.0%

Key Addresses

3 addresses
Deployer
0xbc51…108a
Unlocked LP Held By
0x52e5…45b40x1d2a…158c

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

What Raised This Score

8 factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN (implementation ABI unreadable)
  • Contract source NOT verified
  • Top-10 concentration > 50% (81.9% total → 62.0% effective; 48.7% in EOAs, 33.2% in contracts — heavy)
  • LP top1 unlocked holder = 99.8% (independent LP — depth risk)
  • LP top3 unlocked holders = 100.0% (independent LP — depth risk)
  • LP claimed locked but only 0.0% actually locked
  • Token age < 7 days (early, volatile)

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
Dai Stablecoin (DAI)High RiskAethir Token (ATH)High RiskArbitrum Intern (INTERN)High RiskChipCritical RiskCurve DAO Token (CRV)High RiskCoinbase Wrapped BTC (CBBTC)Critical Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Orthogonal?

This token is brand new. Run a deeper AI-powered analysis of the contract code — free and instant.

Get Detailed Audit