Normal behavior:
The mint() function creates new tokens and assigns them to the contract owner. These tokens are expected to be distributed fairly to users or used for liquidity, staking, or vault interactions.
Issue:
The contract does not implement any mechanism to control or track the distribution of newly minted tokens. The owner can mint to themselves and choose not to distribute or lock tokens, centralizing all supply and violating decentralization assumptions.
Likelihood:
The issue occurs whenever the owner executes mint() and retains full control over minted tokens without an enforced distribution schedule.
It can also occur when ownership is transferred to another address that behaves maliciously or hoards minted tokens.
Impact:
Token holders have no guarantee that new tokens will be distributed fairly or transparently.
The project’s tokenomics and trust model can collapse, as one actor holds the majority supply.
Explanation:
The owner repeatedly calls mint() and accumulates all supply without sharing or vesting. Users cannot verify or enforce fair token distribution.
Implement minting with transparent distribution and hard limits.
Explanation:
This ensures controlled minting with transparent recipients and enforces a maximum total supply cap, preventing misuse.
The contest is live. Earn rewards by submitting a finding.
This is your time to appeal against judgements on your submissions.
Appeals are being carefully reviewed by our judges.