Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

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

Is SKELLY a Scam?

Ethereum
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 31, 2026 · 1 audit on recordNew Launch · 7h old
SummaryAI Copilot

The SKELLY token is a standard ERC-20 implementation. The audit identified critical issues regarding return value consistency and insecure authorization patterns.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Code: Inconsistent Return Values in Transfer Functions
  • Code: Insecure Use of tx.origin for Authorization
Exact factors
  • Code: Inconsistent Return Values in Transfer Functions (High, static analysis)
  • Code: Insecure Use of tx.origin for Authorization (Medium, static analysis)

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 (7h old). New tokens carry elevated risk — data may change rapidly. Always verify independently before investing.

Security Checklist

as of audit · Oct 316 of 7 checks passed
Contract verifiedVerified
OwnershipUnknown
MintNo mint
Liquidity lockLocked
UpgradeabilityFixed code
HoneypotNone found
Buy / sell tax0% / 0%

Holders

as of audit · Oct 31, 2026371 holders
9.1%12.7%Wallets78.2%Everyone else
9.1%12.7%78.2%Everyone else
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
21.8%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking9.1%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell12.7%
  • Everyone else361 holders78.2%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads16.4%
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 31, 2026

Liquidity

as of audit · Oct 31$50.8K across 2 pairs

The risk score reads depth across every pair.

LP tokensLocked

The LP tokens of the analysed pool are locked or burned.

Analysed pool$50.8KShare of depth100.0%
LP Burned100.0% · ≈ permanent lock
LP Locked100.0% · Dead Address

Security Findings

1 High1 Medium6 Info
High

Inconsistent Return Values in Transfer Functions

The _transfer, transfer, and transferFrom functions do not correctly handle return values, which can cause integrations with other DeFi protocols to fail or misinterpret the success of a transaction.CD-01

Issue

The _transfer, transfer, and transferFrom functions do not correctly handle return values, which can cause integrations with other DeFi protocols to fail or misinterpret the success of a transaction.

Fix

Ensure all transfer functions explicitly return a boolean value as required by the ERC-20 standard to maintain compatibility with external contracts.

Status

Unresolved

Medium

Insecure Use of tx.origin for Authorization

The returnTx function uses tx.origin to determine authorization or rules. This is dangerous because a malicious contract can trick an authorized user into calling it, effectively bypassing intended security checks.CD-02

Issue

The returnTx function uses tx.origin to determine authorization or rules. This is dangerous because a malicious contract can trick an authorized user into calling it, effectively bypassing intended security checks.

Fix

Replace tx.origin with msg.sender to ensure that only the immediate caller is authorized to perform sensitive actions.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Who holds the supply

The ten largest holders own 21.8% of supply. What remains: 12.7% in wallets, 9.1% in other contracts. 371 holders in total.QA-HOLDERS

Issue

The ten largest holders own 21.8% of supply. What remains: 12.7% in wallets, 9.1% in other contracts. 371 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

371 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

371 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

Liquidity burned — cannot be withdrawn

100.0% of the pool's LP is burned or time-locked. 100.0% of the LP tokens were sent to a burn address — that liquidity can never be withdrawn by anyone. Some pools are concentrated-liquidity (V3/V4) positions; shares above are by position as GoPlus reports them.QA-LIQUIDITY

Issue

100.0% of the pool's LP is burned or time-locked. 100.0% of the LP tokens were sent to a burn address — that liquidity can never be withdrawn by anyone. Some pools are concentrated-liquidity (V3/V4) positions; shares above are by position as GoPlus reports them.

Fix

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

Status

Acknowledged

Info

The market for this token

Liquidity $51K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $345K (DexScreener, all pools).QA-MARKET

Issue

Liquidity $51K (DexScreener, all pools). 24h trading volume $345K (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: fixed — the contract has no mint function. Control: an owner that could not be resolved. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $51K of DEX liquidity across 2 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: fixed — the contract has no mint function. Control: an owner that could not be resolved. Code: not upgradeable (no proxy). Fees: no buy or sell tax. Market: $51K of DEX liquidity across 2 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 31
Executive SummaryWhat the contract is and what the review found

The SKELLY token is a standard ERC-20 implementation. The audit identified critical issues regarding return value consistency and insecure authorization patterns. While the core token logic follows standard patterns, the implementation of custom transfer rules and authorization logic introduces significant risks to token holders.

Technical9/10Low risk

The contract utilizes standard OpenZeppelin-like ERC-20 structures for core functionality. Code quality is generally high, adhering to modern Solidity standards. However, the logic in the transfer path fails to return expected values, and the use of tx.origin creates potential security gaps. These issues impact 7.1 Architecture and 7.2 Code Security.

Governance9/10Low risk

The token lacks centralized administrative controls, which limits 7.5 Governance risks. Economic parameters are static, reducing 7.4 Economic risk. However, the reliance on tx.origin for rules could lead to unexpected behavior in complex DeFi interactions.

Upgrades10/10Low risk

The contract is not upgradeable, eliminating 7.7 Upgrades risk. The architecture is immutable, ensuring that the current logic remains fixed for the lifetime of the contract.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

The development team should immediately refactor the transfer functions to ensure consistent boolean return values to maintain compatibility with standard DeFi protocols.

Furthermore, replace all instances of tx.origin with msg.sender to prevent potential authorization bypasses via malicious intermediary contracts. Users should exercise caution when interacting with this token in complex smart contract environments until these issues are addressed. A formal verification of the transfer path is recommended after the suggested refactoring.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
TypeToken
NetworkEthereum
Token age7h
Contract0xfedc…905f
Deployer0xf0c9…d67d
Badge for your website
SKELLY 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. Oct 31, 202634Low

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

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the SKELLY contract address?

The SKELLY contract on Ethereum is 0xfedcb1513b389b1c4d243f85c56557e86de0905f. Compare it with the address the project itself publishes before trading: other contracts can carry the same name and ticker.

Is SKELLY a scam?

Quantum Audit's risk score for SKELLY is 34/100 (Low risk) as of Oct 31, 2026, computed by a deterministic function from on-chain facts — Contract verified: Verified; Mint: No mint; Liquidity lock: Locked; Upgradeability: Fixed code; Honeypot: None found; Buy / sell tax: 0% / 0%. A score is a dated snapshot of those facts, not a guarantee; each one is listed on this page.

Is SKELLY liquidity locked?

Liquidity lock: Locked (as of Oct 31, 2026). Total DEX liquidity: $50.8K.

Who holds SKELLY?

As of Oct 31, 2026, the 10 largest holders own 21.8% of the supply across 371 holders. The Holders section on this page shows who they are by holder type.

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of SKELLY?

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? Add your links and get it Verified