ConConAI Info
People research with AI - but only a fraction let it complete a purchase, while most are open to it. That guided, trusted middle is exactly where ConConAI lives.
TrustNet Score
The TrustNet Score evaluates crypto projects based on audit results, security, KYC verification, and social media presence. This score offers a quick, transparent view of a project's credibility, helping users make informed decisions in the Web3 space.
Real-Time Threat Detection
Real-time threat detection, powered by Cyvers.io,
is currently not
activated
for this project.
This advanced feature provides continuous monitoring and instant alerts to safeguard your assets from potential security threats. Real-time detection enhances your project's security by proactively identifying and mitigating risks.
For more information, click here.
Security Assessments
Summary and Final Words
No crucial issues found
The contract does not contain issues of high or medium criticality. This means that no known vulnerabilities were found in the source code.
Contract owner cannot mint
It is not possible to mint new tokens.
Contract owner cannot blacklist addresses.
It is not possible to lock user funds by blacklisting addresses.
Contract owner cannot set high fees
The fees, if applicable, can be a maximum of 25% or lower. The contract can therefore not be locked. Please take a look in the comment section for more details.
Contract cannot be locked
Owner cannot lock any user funds.
Token cannot be burned
There is no burning within the contract without any allowances
Ownership is renounced
The contract does not include owner functions that allow post-deployment modifications.
Contract is not upgradeable
The contract does not use proxy patterns or other mechanisms to allow future upgrades. Its behavior is locked in its current state.
Scope of Work
This audit encompasses the evaluation of the files listed below, each verified with a SHA-1 Hash. The team referenced above has provided the necessary files for assessment.
The auditing process consists of the following systematic steps:
- Specification Review: Analyze the provided specifications, source code, and instructions to fully understand the smart contract's size, scope, and functionality.
- Manual Code Examination: Conduct a thorough line-by-line review of the source code to identify potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement.
- Specification Alignment: Ensure that the code accurately implements the provided specifications and intended functionalities.
- Test Coverage Assessment: Evaluate the extent and effectiveness of test cases in covering the codebase, identifying any gaps in testing.
- Symbolic Execution: Analyze the smart contract to determine how various inputs affect execution paths, identifying potential edge cases and vulnerabilities.
- Best Practices Evaluation: Assess the smart contracts against established industry and academic best practices to enhance efficiency, maintainability, and security.
- Actionable Recommendations: Provide detailed, specific, and actionable steps to secure and optimize the smart contracts.
A file with a different Hash has been intentionally or otherwise modified after the security review. A different Hash may indicate a changed condition or potential vulnerability that was not within the scope of this review.
Final Words
The following provides a concise summary of the audit report, accompanied by insightful comments from the auditor. This overview captures the key findings and observations, offering valuable context and clarity.
Smart Contract Analysis Statement
Contract Analysis
The ConCon contract implements an ERC20 token with a permanently fixed supply, gasless approvals through the permit standard, and a voluntary burn capability. The entire supply of 100,000,000 CON is minted a single time to the treasury when the contract is deployed, and there is no mint function anywhere in the code, so the supply can only ever decrease when holders choose to burn their own tokens. There is no owner or administrator, no pause switch, no blacklist, and no transfer hooks that could block or tax transfers. A conformance check confirmed the token exposes every standard ERC20 function with the correct return types and emits the transfer and approval events with indexed parameters. The review found no critical, high, medium, or low severity issues; the observations are informational and relate to standard ERC20 behaviour and dependency hygiene.
Ownership Privileges
The ownership of the contract has been removed entirely by design; the token has no owner or administrator. Because there is no privileged role, the usual owner privileges are simply absent:
- No address can mint new tokens, since the supply is created once at deployment and no mint path exists.
- No address can pause transfers or freeze balances.
- No address can blacklist accounts or block transfers through hooks.
- No address can set or change a transfer fee, because none exists.
- Holders may burn their own tokens, or burn from an allowance granted to them, which only ever reduces the total supply.
- The permit feature lets holders approve spenders through a signature, with per-account nonces and chain binding that prevent a signature from being replayed.
- The constructor rejects a zero treasury address, so the full supply cannot be minted to nowhere.
- Since there is no ownership, there is nothing to transfer, renounce, or compromise at the token level.
Security Features
The contract implements several positive security features:
- A permanently fixed supply with no mint entry point, so the circulating amount can never be inflated.
- A neutral, non-custodial design with no owner powers over balances, no pause, and no blacklist.
- Standard, widely-reviewed token building blocks for transfers, burning and signature-based approvals, rather than bespoke logic.
- Replay-resistant permit approvals bound to the chain and to monotonic per-account nonces.
Note - This Audit report consists of a security analysis of the ConCon smart contract. This analysis did not include economic analysis of the contract's tokenomics. Moreover, we only audited the main contract for the ConCon team. Other contracts associated with the project were not audited by our team. We recommend investors do their own research before investing.
Files and details
Findings and Audit result
optimization Issues | 1 findings
Acknowledged
#1 optimization Issue
Minor readability and bytecode notes
There are no material gas concerns in this token. The only optional cleanups are trimming the duplicated public metadata constants and keeping numeric literals in the readable scientific form already used.
informational Issues | 4 findings
Acknowledged
#1 informational Issue
Standard ERC-20 approval race condition
The token uses the standard approve model, which is subject to the classic allowance race condition (SWC-114): a spender trusted with an allowance can, by timing, spend both the old and the new amounts when the owner changes an existing non-zero allowance. This is inherent to the ERC-20 standard rather than a defect in this token.
Resolved
#2 informational Issue
Floating pragma and EVM target should be fixed for deployment
The token source used a floating compiler pragma, leaving ambiguity between the audited and deployed compiler. The configured EVM target produces PUSH0-based bytecode, which is correct for mainnet.
Acknowledged
#3 informational Issue
Dependency version hygiene
The token pins OpenZeppelin 5.1.0. The modules it uses are not affected by any known advisory for that release, but it is not the latest patch of the 5.x line.
Acknowledged
#4 informational Issue
Redundant public metadata constants
The token exposes public constants that mirror the name and symbol already available through the standard ERC-20 metadata getters, duplicating information and adding a small amount of bytecode.