Quantum Audit Logo
Launch App

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

Is SPARK Safe?

Base
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
Technical10/10Governance6/10Upgrades7/10Checks passed6 of 7Findings1 Low · 3 Info4
SummaryAI Copilot

The SPARK token contract is a straightforward ERC20 implementation, leveraging battle-tested OpenZeppelin libraries for its core functionality and ERC20Permit extension.

Read the full analysis
What raised the score
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN
  • Top-10 concentration > 20%
  • 1 Low finding(s) from audit
Exact factors
  • Ownership status UNKNOWN (owner could not be resolved)
  • Top-10 concentration > 20% (44.1% total → 25.1% effective; 12.4% in EOAs, 31.7% in contracts — mild)
  • 1 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

Security Checklist

as of audit · Sep 46 of 7 checks passed
Contract verifiedVerified
OwnershipUnknown
MintNo mint
Liquidity lockLocked
UpgradeabilityFixed code
HoneypotNone found
Buy / sell tax0% / 0%

Holders

as of audit · Sep 4, 2026
31.7%Contracts12.4%Wallets55.9%Everyone else
31.7%Contracts12.4%55.9%Everyone else
ContractsWalletsEveryone elseBubble area = share of supply
44.1%of supply sits with the top 10 holders
  • Contractstreasury, vesting, bridge, staking31.7%
  • Walletsanonymous holders, free to sell12.4%
  • Everyone elsethe rest of the supply55.9%
Effective concentrationwhat the score reads25.1%
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$141.6K across 6 pairs

The risk score reads depth across every pair.

LP tokensLocked

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

Analysed pool$104.8KShare of depth74.0%
LP Locked100.0% · UNCX V4 Lock

Security Findings

1 Low3 Info
Low

permit Function Transaction Front-Running

The permit function, while enabling gasless approvals, is susceptible to front-running (7.2 Code Security). A malicious actor monitoring the mempool could observe a signed permit message, and if the deadline allows, submit their own transaction with a higher gas price to approve and then spend the tokens before the legitimate transaction confirms. This is a known characteristic of the ERC20Permit standard and not a bug in the implementation itself, but a risk for users.L-01

Issue

The permit function, while enabling gasless approvals, is susceptible to front-running (7.2 Code Security). A malicious actor monitoring the mempool could observe a signed permit message, and if the deadline allows, submit their own transaction with a higher gas price to approve and then spend the tokens before the legitimate transaction confirms. This is a known characteristic of the ERC20Permit standard and not a bug in the implementation itself, but a risk for users.

Fix

Users should be advised to set a sufficiently short deadline for permit signatures to minimize the window for front-running. Additionally, users should be cautious when broadcasting permit signatures and consider using services that protect against front-running where available.

Status

Unresolved

Info

Reliance on Battle-Tested OpenZeppelin Libraries

The SPARK token contract leverages standard and widely-audited OpenZeppelin contracts for its ERC20 and ERC20Permit implementations. This significantly reduces the likelihood of common vulnerabilities (7.2 Code Security) such as reentrancy, integer overflows/underflows, and standard ERC20 compliance issues, as these base contracts have undergone extensive scrutiny and are considered industry best practice.I-01

Issue

The SPARK token contract leverages standard and widely-audited OpenZeppelin contracts for its ERC20 and ERC20Permit implementations. This significantly reduces the likelihood of common vulnerabilities (7.2 Code Security) such as reentrancy, integer overflows/underflows, and standard ERC20 compliance issues, as these base contracts have undergone extensive scrutiny and are considered industry best practice.

Fix

No action required. This is a strength of the contract's design.

Status

Resolved

Info

Immutability of Token Supply and Parameters

The SPARK token has a fixed total supply that is minted entirely during the constructor call (7.4 Economic). There are no functions for further minting or burning (beyond standard transfers to/from address(0) which adjust total supply). Similarly, the token's name, symbol, and decimals are set in the constructor and cannot be changed. This design provides predictability and transparency regarding the token's supply and characteristics but limits any future flexibility or adjustments.I-02

Issue

The SPARK token has a fixed total supply that is minted entirely during the constructor call (7.4 Economic). There are no functions for further minting or burning (beyond standard transfers to/from address(0) which adjust total supply). Similarly, the token's name, symbol, and decimals are set in the constructor and cannot be changed. This design provides predictability and transparency regarding the token's supply and characteristics but limits any future flexibility or adjustments.

Fix

No action required. This is a design choice. Ensure that the initial deployment parameters (recipient and total supply) are correct, as they cannot be altered.

Status

Resolved

Info

Absence of Administrative Roles

The SPARK token contract does not implement any administrative roles (e.g., owner, pauser, minter) or access control mechanisms (7.3 Access Control) beyond the standard ERC20 functions. This design choice minimizes the attack surface associated with centralized control and single points of failure, as no single entity can unilaterally alter the contract's behavior or freeze funds. However, it also means there are no emergency mechanisms (e.g., pausing transfers in case of a critical vulnerability in an integrated system) or upgrade capabilities (7.8 Operations).I-03

Issue

The SPARK token contract does not implement any administrative roles (e.g., owner, pauser, minter) or access control mechanisms (7.3 Access Control) beyond the standard ERC20 functions. This design choice minimizes the attack surface associated with centralized control and single points of failure, as no single entity can unilaterally alter the contract's behavior or freeze funds. However, it also means there are no emergency mechanisms (e.g., pausing transfers in case of a critical vulnerability in an integrated system) or upgrade capabilities (7.8 Operations).

Fix

No action required. This is a design choice. Stakeholders should be aware of the implications of a fully decentralized and immutable token without administrative intervention capabilities.

Status

Resolved

Analysis

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

The SPARK token contract is a straightforward ERC20 implementation, leveraging battle-tested OpenZeppelin libraries for its core functionality and ERC20Permit extension. The contract is simple, with a fixed supply minted at deployment and no additional administrative roles or complex logic. The primary risks identified are informational regarding its design choices and a low-severity user-side risk associated with the permit function's susceptibility to front-running.

Technical10/10Low risk

The technical architecture (7.1 Architecture) of the SPARK token is robust, relying entirely on well-audited OpenZeppelin ERC20 and ERC20Permit contracts. This significantly mitigates common code security (7.2 Code Security) vulnerabilities like reentrancy and integer overflows. The contract's simplicity, with no complex custom logic, further enhances its security posture. No significant technical vulnerabilities were found, demonstrating a high level of code quality.

Governance6/10Medium risk

The economic model (7.4 Economic) of the SPARK token is very simple: a fixed total supply is minted once during deployment to a specified recipient. There are no further minting or burning capabilities exposed, ensuring a predictable supply. The contract lacks any governance mechanisms (7.5 Governance) or administrative roles, which eliminates risks associated with centralized control but also removes options for emergency intervention or future parameter adjustments.

Upgrades7/10Low risk

The SPARK contract is not designed to be upgradeable (7.7 Upgrades). It is deployed as a standard, immutable contract. This eliminates the complexities and potential risks associated with proxy patterns and upgrade mechanisms, providing certainty regarding its code and behavior post-deployment.

Final RecommendationWhat to do about this score

For deployers, ensure that the initial recipient_ and totalSupply_ parameters in the constructor are precisely as intended, as these are immutable post-deployment.

Given the absence of administrative controls, the token's behavior is entirely determined by its initial configuration and the standard ERC20 logic. For users interacting with the permit function, exercise caution regarding transaction front-running by setting appropriate deadline values and being aware of mempool activity.

Contract & Record

1 audit on record
TypeToken
NetworkBase
Token age3mo
Contract0x0fb0…8248
Deployer0xb1da…1cbc
Badge for your website
SPARK 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. Aug 30, 202614Low

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

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the SPARK contract address?

The SPARK contract on Base is 0x0fb07c88bc6d195c196279523957c004eb868248. Compare it with the address the project itself publishes before trading: other contracts can carry the same name and ticker.

Is SPARK a scam?

Quantum Audit's risk score for SPARK is 14/100 (Low risk) as of Sep 4, 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 SPARK liquidity locked?

Liquidity lock: Locked (as of Sep 4, 2026). Total DEX liquidity: $141.6K.

Who holds SPARK?

As of Sep 4, 2026, the 10 largest holders own 44.1% of the supply. The Holders section on this page shows who they are by holder type.

Related Audits

6 more on the recordAll audits
OpenVPPOVPP · Base15LowBasecatBase13LowBase JuiceBASEJUICE · Base15LowSKI MASK DOGSKI · Base13LowClawBankBase12LowEdelBase16Low

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of SPARK?

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