Peezy Coin security record

Ethereumpeezy.vipX

As of 30 Oct 2026, Peezy Coin has 1 audit report on Trustblock, by CertiK, dated 5 Feb 2025. That report lists no open critical findings. It also holds 1 deployed contract on 1 chain.

Critical findings
No open critical findings
In 1 report.
Open the latest report
Your label, live
Get the label for your site

Record last updated . It holds audits and findings, contracts and incidents up to Oct 2026. Trustblock does not review code.

Audits1

Newest first

AuditSecurity firmDateScopeCritical findingsReport
Peezy - AuditSecurity firm: CertiKDate: Scope: 1 address on EthereumNo open critical findingsOpen · skynet.certik.com

Findings9

Statuses are the security firm’s own, from each report.

SeverityOpenAcknowledgedFixed
Critical000
High102
Medium010
Low050
MediumPotential Sandwich AttacksPeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

A sandwich attack can occur when an attacker notices a transaction involving token swaps or liquidity additions that lacks slippage restrictions or minimum output amount settings. The attacker can exploit this by frontrunning the transaction to purchase one of the assets, thereby manipulating the exchange rate, and then backrunning the transaction to sell the asset for a profit. The referenced functions are invoked without setting slippage restrictions or minimum output amounts, making transactions that trigger these functions particularly vulnerable to sandwich attacks, especially when large input amounts are involved.

Open the report
Low`_transfer()` Function Vulnerable to DoS Attack oPeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

The `_transfer()` function in the contract is vulnerable to a denial-of-service (DoS) attack. The vulnerability arises from the `sellCount` mechanism, which limits the number of sell transactions to 3 per block. The `swapTokensForEth()` function swaps the minimum amount among `amount`, `contractTokenBalance`, and `_maxTaxSwap`, allowing an attacker to exploit the system by repeatedly initiating small token transfer amounts (e.g., 1 token) under certain situations. This attack can effectively block all other sell transactions within the same block. ```solidity=252 if (!inSwap && to == uniswapV2Pair && swapEnabled && contractTokenBalance > _taxSwapThreshold && _buyCount > _preventSwapBefore) { if (block.number > lastSellBlock) { sellCount = 0; } require(sellCount < 3, "Only 3 sells per block!"); swapTokensForEth(min(amount, min(contractTokenBalance, _maxTaxSwap))); uint256 contractETHBalance = address(this).balance; if (contractETHBalance > 0) { sendETHToFee(address(this).balance); } sellCount++; lastSellBlock = block.number; } ```

Open the report
LowMaximum Wallet Limit could be BypassedPeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

The maximum wallet limit `_maxWalletSize` could be bypassed through the `owner` address because of excluding the address from the check. The address `owner` can be used as the transit address to break the maximum wallet limit.

Open the report
LowMiscalculation of Max HoldingPeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

The transaction may be charged fees, so the max holding of the receiver should be the sum of the held tokens and the amount received from the transfer. The fees should not be included in the max holding. ```solidity=238 require(balanceOf(to) + amount <= _maxWalletSize, "Exceeds the maxWalletSize."); ``` - Max holding is checked. ```solidity=268 _balances[to]=_balances[to].add(amount.sub(taxAmount)); ``` - Receiving amount is adjusted. ```solidity=268 _balances[to]=_balances[to].add(amount.sub(taxAmount)); ``` - Balance is increased by the adjusted amount.

Open the report
LowThird-Party Dependency UsagePeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

The `PEEZY` contract is serving as the underlying entity to interact with third-party `uniswapV2Router`. The scope of the audit treats third-party entities as black boxes and assumes their functional correctness. However, in the real world, third parties can be compromised and this may lead to lost or stolen assets.

Open the report
LowUsage of `transfer`/`send` for Sending Native TokPeezy - Audit · CertiK · 5 Feb 2025Acknowledged

It is not recommended to use Solidity's `transfer()` and `send()` functions for transferring native tokens, since some contracts may not be able to receive the funds. Those functions forward only a fixed amount of gas (2300 specifically) and the receiving contracts may run out of gas before finishing the transfer. Also, EVM instructions' gas costs may increase in the future. Thus, some contracts that can receive now may stop working in the future due to the gas limitation. ```solidity=303 _taxWallet.transfer(amount); ``` - `PEEZY.sendETHToFee` uses `transfer()`.

Open the report

Contracts1

AddressChainSource code
0x698b1d54e936b9f772b8f58447194bbc82ec1933Chain: EthereumSource code: Verified source

Show this on your site

Is this your project? Show this record on your own website. The label states what the record holds, links to this page and updates by itself. It is free and needs no sign-in.

Content

Facts

Automatic: the three strongest facts of this project’s own record (its last audit and two more), highlighted. They update with the record. Picking a fact turns Automatic off.

Fixed as
Language

Style

Layout
Theme
Accent
Corners

Format

Size
Date
Embed as
HTML
<head>
<script src="https://widget.trustblock.run/project-widget.min.js" defer></script>
</head>
<body>
<div
data-tb-project-widget
data-tb-project-slug="peezy"
></div>
</body>

Paste the code where the label should appear. It uses no API credit and updates by itself.

Something wrong on this page? A missing report, a wrong date, a finding that was fixed since. Tell us and we check it against its source.

Tell us