Quantum Audit Logo

Is Venice Token Safe?

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

Venice Token VVV
0xacfe…21bf
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 18d ago 1 audit on record
DexScreener ↗
How is this score calculated? → High Risk
Executive SummaryAI Copilot

The Venice token contract is an ERC20 implementation leveraging well-audited Solmate libraries. It features owner-controlled minting and an initial token supply minted to a specified treasury. While technically sound, the primary risk lies in the centralized minting authority, which grants significant economic control to the contract owner.

1 High1 Low2 Informational
Volume 24h
$662.4K
Liquidity
$13.31M
Price
$17.1700
Token Age
1y
Top 10 Holders
92.4%

Security Findings

1 High1 Low2 Info
High

Centralized Minting Authority

H-01The `owner` of the `Venice` contract has the exclusive ability to mint an arbitrary amount of new tokens via the `mint` function. This grants significant power to a single entity, allowing for unlimited inflation and dilution of existing token holders' value. This is an economic risk (7.4 Economic) and an access control concern (7.3 Access Control).
IssueThe `owner` of the `Venice` contract has the exclusive ability to mint an arbitrary amount of new tokens via the `mint` function. This grants significant power to a single entity, allowing for unlimited inflation and dilution of existing token holders' value. This is an economic risk (7.4 Economic) and an access control concern (7.3 Access Control).
FixConsider implementing a more decentralized or constrained minting mechanism, such as a time-locked minting schedule, a cap on total supply, or requiring multi-signature wallet/DAO approval for minting. If centralized minting is intended, ensure robust operational security for the owner key and clear communication to token holders regarding minting policies.
StatusUnresolved
Low

Owner Key Management Criticality

L-01The `Venice` contract relies on a single `owner` address for critical operations, specifically the `mint` function. Compromise of this owner's private key would allow an attacker to mint unlimited tokens, leading to a complete loss of trust and value for the token. This is an operational risk (7.8 Operations) and an access control vulnerability (7.3 Access Control).
IssueThe `Venice` contract relies on a single `owner` address for critical operations, specifically the `mint` function. Compromise of this owner's private key would allow an attacker to mint unlimited tokens, leading to a complete loss of trust and value for the token. This is an operational risk (7.8 Operations) and an access control vulnerability (7.3 Access Control).
FixIt is crucial to secure the owner's private key with best practices, such as a hardware wallet, multi-signature wallet, or a robust key management system. Regular audits of the owner's operational security are recommended.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Lack of Emergency Pause Mechanism

I-01The `Venice` token contract lacks a mechanism to pause transfers or other critical functions in case of an emergency (e.g., a critical vulnerability discovered in an integrated DeFi protocol, a major market exploit, or a regulatory requirement). This could limit the ability to react swiftly to unforeseen events (7.8 Operations).
IssueThe `Venice` token contract lacks a mechanism to pause transfers or other critical functions in case of an emergency (e.g., a critical vulnerability discovered in an integrated DeFi protocol, a major market exploit, or a regulatory requirement). This could limit the ability to react swiftly to unforeseen events (7.8 Operations).
FixConsider adding a pause mechanism, typically controlled by the owner or a governance body, to temporarily halt token operations during emergencies. This should be implemented carefully to avoid centralization risks and should have clear activation/deactivation conditions.
StatusUnresolved
Info

Dependency on Solmate Libraries

I-02The `Venice` contract relies on external Solmate libraries (`ERC20`, `Owned`). While Solmate is a well-regarded and audited library, any undiscovered vulnerability within these dependencies could indirectly affect the security of the `Venice` token (7.6 External).
IssueThe `Venice` contract relies on external Solmate libraries (`ERC20`, `Owned`). While Solmate is a well-regarded and audited library, any undiscovered vulnerability within these dependencies could indirectly affect the security of the `Venice` token (7.6 External).
FixRegularly monitor security advisories and updates for the Solmate library. While direct code changes are not possible for deployed contracts, awareness of dependency risks is important for future deployments or integrations.
StatusUnresolved

Category Ratings

TechnicalLow7/10

The contract leverages the battle-tested Solmate ERC20 and Owned libraries, which are known for their efficiency and security (7.1 Architecture). Custom logic is minimal and correctly implements owner-controlled minting, ensuring that only the designated owner can create new tokens (7.3 Access Control). The use of `unchecked` blocks in Solmate is standard practice and relies on well-understood invariants, mitigating integer overflow/underflow risks (7.2 Code Security). No significant technical vulnerabilities were identified in the custom logic.

GovernanceMedium4/10

The contract clearly defines an `owner` with specific privileges, providing a single point of control for minting operations. The initial supply is minted to a specified `treasury` address, allowing for controlled distribution. A primary economic risk is the centralized minting authority, where the `owner` can mint an unlimited supply of tokens, potentially leading to inflation and dilution of existing token value (7.4 Economic). The security of the owner's private key is paramount, as its compromise would allow an attacker to control the token supply (7.3 Access Control, 7.8 Operations).

UpgradesMedium4/10

The `Venice` contract is implemented as a standard, non-upgradeable contract, which simplifies its architecture and eliminates the complexities and risks associated with proxy upgrade patterns. Its logic is fixed and immutable once deployed, providing predictable behavior. As a non-upgradeable contract, its functionality cannot be modified or extended post-deployment, meaning any future feature additions or bug fixes would require a new contract deployment and migration (7.7 Upgrades).

Security Checklist

2/5 checks passed
Contract VerifiedPass
Ownership RenouncedFail
No Mint FunctionFail
Liquidity LockedFail
Not a ProxyPass

Holder Composition

92.4% in top 10
33.0% in wallets59.5% in contracts
Effective Concentration56.8%

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

$18.54M across 30 pairs
AerodromeWETHanalysed$13.31M71.8%AerodromeWETH$2.25M12.1%AerodromeWETH$2.09M11.3%AerodromeWETH$396.3K2.1%Uniswap v3USDC$192.6K1.0%Uniswap v3WETH$158.0K0.9%
Show 4 more pairsShow less
Uniswap v4USDC$48.4K0.3%Uniswap v4cbBTC$35.6K0.2%Hydrex CLAMMUSDC$18.3K0.1%Uniswap v3USDC$16.0K0.1%

The 20 remaining pairs hold $32.1K between them and are not listed.

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 Holder32.5%
Top-3 Unlocked54.9%

Key Addresses

11 addresses
Deployer
0xc9c8…7e7f
Unlocked LP Held By
0x7d27…fd550xd392…74700xe878…fad90xb0a9…1c2a0xc7da…49590xf01f…433b0xd97e…306b0x666e…d4b50xcce1…ba040x8802…c133

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

What Raised This Score

6 factors
  • Ownership NOT renounced — owner is a contract (governance/executor, not an EOA)
  • Mintable supply — no cap found, dilution unbounded
  • Top-10 concentration > 50% (92.4% total → 56.8% effective; 33.0% in EOAs, 59.5% in contracts — heavy)
  • Liquidity not locked, but no owner/deployer address holds LP — market-depth risk, not rug risk
  • 1 High finding(s) from audit
  • 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

Related Audits

6 more on the record
ACUHigh RiskRainbow (RNBW)High RiskChipWorks (CHIP)High RiskHOMEHigh RiskCTRHigh RiskMetronome Synth ETH (MSETH)High Risk

Would You Like a More Detailed Audit of Venice Token?

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

Get Detailed Audit