| Risk factor | Finding | Evidence | Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sellable | No — the sell tax takes the whole sale | ChainSift simulation | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Buy tax | 0% | Contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Sell tax | 100% | ChainSift simulation | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Admin mint | No data | Contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Transfers pausable | No data | Contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Address blacklist | No data | Contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Upgradeable proxy | No data | Contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Source verified | No | Block explorer | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Top-10 holders | 99.9% | Holder distribution | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Liquidity locked | No | LP holders | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Holders | 32 | Token contract | 24 Oct 2026 |
| Deployed by | 0xdabb53…a6f6d7 |
| Holders | 32 |
| Rank | Address | Share |
|---|---|---|
| #1 · contract | 0xdabb53…a6f6d7 | 99.27% |
| #2 · UniswapV2 · contract | 0x431182…ad4b44 | 0.36% |
| #3 · contract | 0x41dcb2…36161e | 0.05% |
| #4 · contract | 0x6ae3b6…2919e0 | 0.04% |
| #5 · contract | 0x465355…98790f | 0.03% |
This automated check simulated a sale of ASN (Asasar Neon) on Ethereum and found that selling is blocked: the contract applies a sell tax of up to 100%, meaning that, at the time of the check, a holder attempting to sell would have the proceeds effectively confiscated by the contract. This is what's known as honeypot behaviour. In practice, this means tokens can be bought but not meaningfully sold back for value. Alongside this, the contract's source code is not verified on the block explorer, which means the checker could only examine the raw bytecode rather than readable logic, limiting visibility into how the contract behaves beyond what was directly tested. The top 10 holders control 99.9% of the supply, across only 32 holders total, indicating extremely high concentration — a small number of addresses hold nearly all tokens. Liquidity is not locked, meaning whoever controls the liquidity pool could, in principle, withdraw it. Because selling was found to be blocked, the overall score is 0 out of 18, regardless of how other indicators might otherwise read.
It's important to be clear about what this check does not do. It reads contract mechanics only — simulating buy and sell transactions, inspecting tax settings, checking holder distribution and verification status. It does not assess who is behind the project, their intentions, the token's broader economic design, any marketing claims, or whether any legal structure exists around it. No human has reviewed this token or its team; everything above came from automated analysis of on-chain data as it stood on the date of the check.
Given that selling has been found to be blocked, no amount of money put into this token — including a small test amount — would be expected to come back out, since the simulation indicates the contract itself prevents proceeds from a sale. Rather than testing this directly, readers who want to understand more can look at the contract's transaction history on a block explorer to see whether any sales have succeeded recently, review the liquidity pool address to see who holds control over it, and treat unverified source code as a gap in available information rather than something that can be worked around. Any findings here reflect conditions at the time of the check and may change if the contract or its liquidity setup is altered afterward.
Contracts change after they are checked. Tell us where to reach you and we will say when this one does. Free for three contracts, no account.
We checked 18 points out of 100.
The other 82 are where money is usually lost: who the team is, where the tokens sit, what the documents actually say, and what the project chose not to put on its front page.