Quantum Audit Logo

Is Sandisk Corporation Safe?

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

Sandisk Corporation SNDKC
0xb200…10c5
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 9d ago 1 audit on record
DexScreener ↗
How is this score calculated? → Medium Risk
Executive SummaryAI Copilot

This report is based on the provided contract address `0xb200000000000000000000397293cb8cda9a10c5` on the Base network. No source code was supplied for analysis, preventing a comprehensive security assessment of the contract's logic and implementation. Additionally, the contract is unverified on the block explorer. The risk levels are set to 'Low' due to the absence of code to analyze, and findings are limited to informational observations regarding the lack of transparency.

3 Informational
Volume 24h
$1.73M
Liquidity
$814.1K
Price
$1583.7600
Token Age
1y
Top 10 Holders
0.0%

Security Findings

3 Info
Info

Contract Source Code Not Provided

I-01The source code for the contract at 0xb200…10c5 was not provided for analysis. This prevents a comprehensive security audit of the contract's logic, architecture, and potential vulnerabilities.
IssueThe source code for the contract at was not provided for analysis. This prevents a comprehensive security audit of the contract's logic, architecture, and potential vulnerabilities.
FixProvide the full Solidity source code for the contract to enable a complete security assessment.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Contract Not Verified on Block Explorer

I-02The contract at 0xb200…10c5 is marked as unverified on the block explorer for the Base network. Unverified contracts make it difficult for users and auditors to confirm that the deployed bytecode matches the intended source code, increasing trust and transparency risks.
IssueThe contract at is marked as unverified on the block explorer for the Base network. Unverified contracts make it difficult for users and auditors to confirm that the deployed bytecode matches the intended source code, increasing trust and transparency risks.
FixVerify the contract's source code on the Base block explorer (e.g., Basescan) to enhance transparency and allow public scrutiny of its implementation.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Unknown Contract Functionality and Purpose

I-03Without the source code, the specific functionality, purpose, and intended interactions of the contract at 0xb200…10c5 cannot be determined. This limits the ability to assess its role within a broader protocol or its potential impact on users.
IssueWithout the source code, the specific functionality, purpose, and intended interactions of the contract at cannot be determined. This limits the ability to assess its role within a broader protocol or its potential impact on users.
FixProvide documentation or a high-level overview of the contract's intended functionality and its role within the protocol.
StatusUnresolved

Category Ratings

TechnicalMedium6/10

Due to the absence of source code, a technical analysis covering architecture (7.1), code security (7.2), and access control (7.3) could not be conducted. No specific vulnerabilities related to reentrancy, integer overflows, or other common technical flaws could be identified. The contract's unverified status (I-02) further hinders technical review. The technical risk is assessed as low by default, as no issues were found.

GovernanceHigh3/10

Without access to the contract's source code, an assessment of economic (7.4) and governance (7.5) mechanisms is not possible. Potential risks such as oracle manipulation, flash loan vulnerabilities, or centralized control points cannot be evaluated. The unknown functionality (I-03) prevents a contextual economic review. The governance and economic risk is considered low by default due to the lack of information.

UpgradesMedium5/10

The upgradeability status (7.7) of the contract cannot be determined without its source code. It is unknown if the contract utilizes proxy patterns (e.g., UUPS, Transparent) or if it is immutable. Operational aspects (7.8) and external dependencies (7.6) also remain unassessable. The lack of source code (I-01) prevents any assessment of upgrade safety. The upgrade risk is set to low as no upgrade mechanisms could be identified.

Security Checklist

1/5 checks passed
Contract VerifiedFail
Ownership Renounced?
No Mint Function?
Liquidity LockedFail
Not a ProxyPass

Liquidity Depth

$815.7K across 5 pairs
AerodromeUSDCanalysed$814.1K99.8%Uniswap v4USDC$1.1K0.1%Uniswap v4ETH$5960.1%EqualizerUSDC$190.0%

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.

What Raised This Score

4 factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Mint capability UNKNOWN (implementation ABI unreadable)
  • Contract source NOT verified
  • Liquidity NOT locked (owner can withdraw — rug-pull risk)

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
Jerry the goat (JERRY)Medium RiskHunter Biden's Laptop (LAPTOP)Medium RiskTesla Inc. (TSLAC)Medium RiskMicrosoft Corporation (MSFTC)Medium RiskBitVault Signal (BV7X)Medium RiskCoinbase Man (BRIAN)Medium Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Sandisk Corporation?

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

Get Detailed Audit