Quantum Audit Logo

Is Space Exploration Technologies Corp. Safe?

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

Space Exploration Technologies Corp. SPCXC
0xb200…cbd5
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 generated for contract address 0xb2000000000000000000007b9fcbd005511acbd5 on the Base network. No contract source code was provided for analysis. Therefore, a comprehensive security audit could not be performed, and all risk assessments are based on the absence of information rather than code review.

3 Informational
Volume 24h
$665.4K
Liquidity
$928.0K
Price
$149.6500
Token Age
1y
Top 10 Holders
0.0%

Security Findings

3 Info
Info

Missing Contract Source Code

I-01The source code for the contract at address 0xb200…cbd5 was not provided or verified on the block explorer. This prevents any form of static analysis, dynamic analysis, or manual code review.
IssueThe source code for the contract at address was not provided or verified on the block explorer. This prevents any form of static analysis, dynamic analysis, or manual code review.
FixIt is strongly recommended to verify the contract source code on the block explorer (e.g., Etherscan, Basescan) to ensure transparency and allow for public scrutiny and security analysis. Without verified source, users cannot independently confirm the contract's intended functionality or security properties.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Inability to Assess Code Security (7.2)

I-02Due to the absence of source code, it was impossible to assess the contract for common code security vulnerabilities such as reentrancy, integer overflows/underflows, denial-of-service vectors, or unchecked external calls. The fundamental security posture of the contract remains unknown.
IssueDue to the absence of source code, it was impossible to assess the contract for common code security vulnerabilities such as reentrancy, integer overflows/underflows, denial-of-service vectors, or unchecked external calls. The fundamental security posture of the contract remains unknown.
FixOnce the source code is verified, a comprehensive security audit should be performed to identify and mitigate potential vulnerabilities. This includes static analysis, dynamic testing, and manual review by experienced auditors.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Inability to Assess Access Control and Economic Logic (7.3, 7.4)

I-03Without the contract's source code, the implementation of access control mechanisms (e.g., ownership, role-based access) and the economic logic (e.g., tokenomics, fee structures, reward distribution) could not be evaluated. This leaves critical aspects of the contract's operational security and financial integrity unverified.
IssueWithout the contract's source code, the implementation of access control mechanisms (e.g., ownership, role-based access) and the economic logic (e.g., tokenomics, fee structures, reward distribution) could not be evaluated. This leaves critical aspects of the contract's operational security and financial integrity unverified.
FixUpon source code verification, a detailed review of access control patterns and economic logic is essential. Ensure that privileged functions are adequately protected, roles are clearly defined, and the economic model is robust against manipulation or unintended consequences.
StatusUnresolved

Category Ratings

TechnicalMedium6/10

Due to the absence of contract source code, a technical review of the contract's architecture (7.1), code security (7.2), and access control mechanisms (7.3) could not be conducted. Standard checks for reentrancy, integer overflows, and common EVM vulnerabilities were not possible. Without source, no specific strengths or issues can be identified.

GovernanceHigh3/10

The economic model (7.4) and governance structure (7.5) of the contract could not be evaluated without access to the source code. This prevents analysis of tokenomics, fee structures, or decision-making processes. External dependencies (7.6) and their potential impact also remain unverified.

UpgradesMedium5/10

The upgradeability (7.7) of the contract, including the use of proxy patterns or immutable deployments, could not be determined without source code. Operational aspects (7.8) such as pause mechanisms or emergency procedures are also unknown. Therefore, no specific upgrade safety issues or strengths can be reported.

Security Checklist

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

Liquidity Depth

$964.4K across 8 pairs
AerodromeUSDCanalysed$928.0K96.2%Uniswap v3USDC$31.7K3.3%Uniswap v4USDC$1.6K0.2%Uniswap v4USDC$1.2K0.1%AerodromeWETH$8300.1%Uniswap v4ETH$8130.1%
Show 2 more pairsShow less
Uniswap v3USDC$2230.0%AerodromeDRB$630.0%

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
Virtual Protocol (VIRTUAL)Medium RiskCookieMedium RiskStockify (STFY)Medium RiskBasepepeMedium RiskMoltbook (MOLT)Medium RiskKellyClaudeMedium Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Space Exploration Technologies Corp.?

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

Get Detailed Audit