Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

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

Is plumber Safe?

PLUMBERBase
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
Technical10/10Governance5/10Upgrades6/10Checks passed4 of 7Findings3 Info3
SummaryAI Copilot

This audit report is based on the analysis of a contract for which no source code was provided.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • Token age < 30 days
Exact factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN (implementation ABI unreadable)
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • Token age < 30 days (still settling)

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 44 of 7 checks passed
Contract verifiedVerified
OwnershipUnknown
MintUnknown
Liquidity lockNot locked
UpgradeabilityFixed code
HoneypotNone found
Buy / sell tax0% / 0%

Holders

as of audit · Sep 4, 2026
12.7%Contracts85.5%Everyone else
12.7%85.5%Everyone else
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
14.5%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking12.7%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell1.8%
  • Everyone elsethe rest of the supply85.5%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads6.9%
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$373.2K across 22 pairs
Show 4 more pairs

The 12 remaining pairs hold $210 between them and are not listed. 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$234.6KShare of depth62.9%
Top-1 Unlocked Holder24.2%
Top-3 Unlocked57.6%
Unlocked LP held by
0x4c12…da0a0x0d52…e7420x5004…4d870x3b0c…3fcd0x575e…fe980xb3b7…62b60x5833…63f50xd1a9…61c00x1b34…3e960x4ff4…0c71

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

Security Findings

3 Info
Info

Absence of Verified Source Code

The contract at address 0xb200…29b1 on the Base network is not verified, meaning its Solidity source code is not publicly available or linked to the deployed bytecode. This prevents any form of security analysis, functional understanding, or trust establishment.I-01

Issue

The contract at address on the Base network is not verified, meaning its Solidity source code is not publicly available or linked to the deployed bytecode. This prevents any form of security analysis, functional understanding, or trust establishment.

Fix

For any contract intended for public interaction, always verify the source code on the blockchain explorer. This allows for transparency, community review, and security audits, which are crucial for building trust and ensuring safety.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Inability to Perform Comprehensive Security Audit

Due to the lack of source code, a comprehensive security audit covering aspects like reentrancy, access control, integer overflows, economic exploits, or upgradeability risks cannot be performed. The contract's behavior remains entirely opaque.I-02

Issue

Due to the lack of source code, a comprehensive security audit covering aspects like reentrancy, access control, integer overflows, economic exploits, or upgradeability risks cannot be performed. The contract's behavior remains entirely opaque.

Fix

Prior to any deployment or public release, ensure that all smart contracts undergo a thorough security audit by qualified professionals. This audit should be based on the complete and final source code.

Status

Unresolved

Info

High Risk of Malicious Functionality

Without source code, there is an unquantifiable and extremely high risk that the contract contains malicious functionality, such as backdoors, hidden administrative privileges, self-destruct mechanisms, or arbitrary fund transfers, which could lead to a complete loss of user assets.I-03

Issue

Without source code, there is an unquantifiable and extremely high risk that the contract contains malicious functionality, such as backdoors, hidden administrative privileges, self-destruct mechanisms, or arbitrary fund transfers, which could lead to a complete loss of user assets.

Fix

Users should exercise extreme caution and avoid interacting with unverified contracts. Always prioritize transparency and only engage with protocols that have publicly verified source code and a strong track record of security.

Status

Unresolved

Analysis

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

This audit report is based on the analysis of a contract for which no source code was provided. The contract at address 0xb20000000000000000000029440a9564b59129b1 on the Base network is unverified. Without access to the Solidity source code, a comprehensive security assessment is impossible. All risk levels are considered high or critical due to the complete lack of transparency and auditability. Users are strongly advised against interacting with unverified contracts.

Technical10/10Low risk

Without access to the contract's source code (7.2 Code Security), a technical assessment of its architecture (7.1 Architecture), potential vulnerabilities like reentrancy or integer overflows, and adherence to secure coding practices is impossible. The lack of transparency inherently introduces a high technical risk, as the contract's functionality and potential exploits remain unknown. Any interaction with such a contract carries significant, unquantifiable technical risk.

Governance5/10Medium risk

The economic model (7.4 Economic) and governance mechanisms (7.5 Governance) of this contract cannot be evaluated without source code. This means there is no way to determine if the contract contains backdoors, hidden fees, or centralized control that could lead to rug pulls or other malicious economic exploits. The absence of transparency makes any economic interaction extremely risky, as the contract's true intent and behavior are unknown.

Upgrades6/10Medium risk

The upgradeability status (7.7 Upgrades) of this contract cannot be determined without source code. It is unknown if the contract is designed to be upgradeable, and if so, what proxy pattern (e.g., UUPS, Transparent) is used, or what controls are in place for upgrades. This lack of information poses a high risk, as a malicious upgrade could alter the contract's logic, drain funds, or introduce new vulnerabilities without warning.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

Given the complete absence of source code for the contract at , it is strongly recommended to avoid any interaction with this contract.

Deploying or interacting with unverified contracts on a blockchain carries the highest possible risk, as their functionality, security, and potential for malicious behavior cannot be assessed. For any future deployments, ensure that all contract source code is publicly verified on the blockchain explorer and undergoes thorough, independent security audits before deployment and public interaction. Transparency and auditability are fundamental pillars of smart contract security.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
Type-
NetworkBase
Token age22d
Contract0xb200…29b1
Badge for your website
plumber 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, 202618Low
  2. Sep 3, 202622Low

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

Related Audits

6 more on the recordAll audits
SAIRIBase18LowCoinbase Wrapped HyperliquidCBHYPE · Base18LowFAIBase19LowKeetaKTA · Base17LowApple Inc.AAPLC · Base17LowvAPI NetworkVAPI · Base17Low

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of plumber?

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