Quantum Audit Logo

Is Roba Safe?

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

Roba ROBA
0xe884…54c6
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 today 1 audit on record
DexScreener ↗
How is this score calculated? → Low Risk
Executive SummaryAI Copilot

The Roba token contract is a standard ERC20 implementation, inheriting functionalities from OpenZeppelin's ERC20, ERC20Burnable, and ERC20Permit. It features a fixed total supply minted at deployment to a specified recipient. The contract contains no custom logic beyond the constructor, relying entirely on battle-tested OpenZeppelin libraries. This design choice results in a highly secure and predictable token with minimal attack surface.

2 Low2 Informational
Volume 24h
$81.9K
Liquidity
$95.8K
Price
$0.0005086
Token Age
11mo
Top 10 Holders
32.6%

Security Findings

2 Low2 Info
Low

Immutability and Fixed Supply

L-01The token's total supply is fixed at deployment (1,000,000,000 ROBA) and minted entirely to a single recipient. There are no functions to mint additional tokens or modify the supply post-deployment. While this ensures a predictable token economy and prevents inflationary attacks, it also limits any future flexibility for tokenomics adjustments or ecosystem incentives.
IssueThe token's total supply is fixed at deployment (1,000,000,000 ROBA) and minted entirely to a single recipient. There are no functions to mint additional tokens or modify the supply post-deployment. While this ensures a predictable token economy and prevents inflationary attacks, it also limits any future flexibility for tokenomics adjustments or ecosystem incentives.
FixThis is a design choice. Ensure that the fixed supply and initial distribution strategy align with the long-term vision and economic model of the project. If future flexibility is desired, a different token design with controlled minting/burning mechanisms would be required.
StatusUnresolved
Low

Absence of Administrative Roles

L-02The contract does not implement any administrative roles such as an owner, pauser, minter, or blacklister. This design choice enhances decentralization by removing central points of control and potential attack vectors associated with privileged roles. However, it also means that no emergency actions (e.g., pausing transfers in case of a critical vulnerability or blacklisting malicious addresses) can be taken post-deployment.
IssueThe contract does not implement any administrative roles such as an owner, pauser, minter, or blacklister. This design choice enhances decentralization by removing central points of control and potential attack vectors associated with privileged roles. However, it also means that no emergency actions (e.g., pausing transfers in case of a critical vulnerability or blacklisting malicious addresses) can be taken post-deployment.
FixThis is a deliberate design choice for decentralization. Projects should be fully aware of the implications: the contract is immutable and unmanageable after deployment. If emergency control or future administrative capabilities are deemed necessary, a different contract architecture with appropriate access control mechanisms should be considered.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Standard OpenZeppelin Implementation

I-01The Roba contract is a direct implementation of ERC20, ERC20Burnable, and ERC20Permit using battle-tested OpenZeppelin libraries. This approach significantly reduces the risk of common smart contract vulnerabilities, as the underlying components have undergone extensive audits and community review.
IssueThe Roba contract is a direct implementation of ERC20, ERC20Burnable, and ERC20Permit using battle-tested OpenZeppelin libraries. This approach significantly reduces the risk of common smart contract vulnerabilities, as the underlying components have undergone extensive audits and community review.
FixNo specific recommendation is needed for this finding, as it highlights a strength. Continue to monitor OpenZeppelin updates for any critical security patches, although direct contract updates are not possible for this immutable contract.
StatusUnresolved
Info

ERC20Permit Feature for Gasless Approvals

I-02The inclusion of the `ERC20Permit` extension allows users to approve token spending by signing an off-chain message, enabling gasless approvals. This improves user experience by separating the approval action from the on-chain transaction. OpenZeppelin's implementation correctly uses nonces to prevent replay attacks, but users must still handle signed messages securely.
IssueThe inclusion of the `ERC20Permit` extension allows users to approve token spending by signing an off-chain message, enabling gasless approvals. This improves user experience by separating the approval action from the on-chain transaction. OpenZeppelin's implementation correctly uses nonces to prevent replay attacks, but users must still handle signed messages securely.
FixEducate users about the `permit` function, its benefits, and the importance of securing their private keys and being cautious about signing messages. Ensure any front-end interfaces interacting with `permit` clearly explain the implications of signing such transactions.
StatusUnresolved

Category Ratings

TechnicalLow10/10

The technical architecture (7.1) of the Roba token is robust, leveraging well-audited OpenZeppelin contracts for its core ERC20, burnable, and permit functionalities. The code security (7.2) is high due to the minimal custom logic and reliance on battle-tested libraries, mitigating common vulnerabilities like reentrancy and integer overflows. Access control (7.3) is decentralized, as the token has no administrative roles, ensuring no single entity can control token transfers or supply. External interactions (7.6) are limited to standard ERC20 interfaces, reducing attack vectors.

GovernanceMedium5/10

The economic model (7.4) of the Roba token is straightforward: a fixed supply is minted at creation, with no provisions for future minting or burning by an administrator. This ensures predictability but limits flexibility for future tokenomics adjustments. Governance (7.5) is entirely decentralized, as the contract lacks any administrative roles or upgrade mechanisms. This design choice eliminates central points of failure but also means no emergency actions (e.g., pausing transfers, blacklisting) can be taken in unforeseen circumstances.

UpgradesMedium6/10

The Roba token contract is not designed to be upgradeable (7.7). It does not implement any proxy patterns or upgrade mechanisms. This eliminates all risks associated with upgradeability, such as proxy implementation bugs, upgrade path vulnerabilities, or administrative key compromises related to upgrades. The contract's immutability ensures its code remains unchanged post-deployment.

Security Checklist

3/5 checks passed
Contract VerifiedPass
Ownership Renounced?
No Mint FunctionPass
Liquidity LockedFail
Not a ProxyPass
HoneypotNoneBuy Tax0.0%Sell Tax0.0%

Holder Composition

32.6% in top 10
12.0% in wallets20.5% in contracts
Effective Concentration20.2%

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

$95.8K across 2 pairs
AerodromeUSDCanalysed$95.8K100.0%Uniswap v4USDC$40.0%

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.

LP Distribution

Top-1 Unlocked Holder37.2%
Top-3 Unlocked77.2%

Key Addresses

11 addresses
Deployer
0x1b19…a7bf
Unlocked LP Held By
0x9b05…520a0xaaed…6d6e0x57d5…eb050x3662…ba860xc43a…d5160xaf84…53150x0762…a2140xfa8b…bca70xb714…7caf0xda5b…f984

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

What Raised This Score

4 factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Top-10 concentration > 20% (32.6% total → 20.2% effective; 12.0% in EOAs, 20.5% in contracts — mild)
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • 2 Low finding(s) from audit

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
BLUE CHIP (BLUECHIP)Low RiskFAILow RiskNVIDIA Corporation (NVDAC)Medium RiskSAIRILow RiskAlphabet Inc. (GOOGLC)Medium RiskCoinbase Wrapped Hyperliquid (CBHYPE)Low Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Roba?

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

Get Detailed Audit