Quote from: Cryptoababe on August 01, 2023, 08:38:10 PM

Quote from: vv181 on August 01, 2023, 03:59:10 PM

Can you give examples of such contracts?

As far as I know, renouncing the contract ownership is mainly done to make the community trust the dev could not toy around with the project. The issue you raises is something new for me. Executing a swap function without `owner` control seems theoretically possible. So if you could share some examples, it would be good.

Do you know that some newbies didn't know that dev can still remove liquidity after contract has been renounced?
Have seen a lot like this. Contract is renounced, then people start buying, then dev remove liquidity.

Obviously. Newbie won't bother or at the very least did not comprehend the technical stuff. But I don't whether what issue raised by OP, which is manualSwap function, is related to liquidity functionality as in your case.

Quote from: nelson4lov on August 01, 2023, 10:49:54 PM

Shitcoin devs constantly looking for new ways to get away with protocol funding. These days I don't blindly trust smart contracts until I have thoroughly gone through the contract code especially if it has been verified in an explorer.

Quote from: vv181 on August 01, 2023, 03:59:10 PM

After all, there is no short amount of scam methods involving a smart contract, a programmable contract, which some layman surely does not comprehend what it actually does or the possibility of the scheme. So it is essential to refrain from gambling around with some obscure and unknown token.

Malicious devs like that often take advantage of the fact that most users don't know the technical details about how most of the smart contract functions work. So they use it to their advantage. Access control vulnerabilities are some of the most common I've seen. If I come across any of such contracts in the future, I'd be sure to share them.

Besides the users did not understand the technical detail, mostly they also did not aware of the possibility of the technical capability, which is my main point. So surely it is blissful for the scammer to make a handy improvement to their scamming scheme technique. Since it is programmable, I'm sure it will keep evolving by maximising the flexibility of the contract function and any idea of improvement technique.