Contract Powers Registry / ethereum
stETH
0xae7ab96520de3a18e5e111b5eaab095312d7fe84 on ethereum
In one line: upgradeable proxy (etherscan-declared); retained powers: mint, pause.
Can this code be replaced?
Yes — this is a proxy. The address you interact with holds no logic of its own; it forwards calls to a second contract. Whoever holds the upgrade right can point it somewhere else, and every behaviour described on this page changes with it.
| Pattern | etherscan-declared |
|---|---|
| Current logic | 0x028271e30a695c0527a0c50ca30603fed004cdb0 |
| Logic name | Lido |
| Logic source verified | Yes |
Raw storage evidence (1)
etherscan.Implementation→0x028271e30a695c0527a0c50ca30603fed004cdb0
Who holds the keys?
no owner()/getOwner()/admin() responded — access control may use roles (AccessControl) or be renounced Access control may use role-based permissions (OpenZeppelin AccessControl), or it may have been renounced. This registry does not enumerate role holders.
What the privileged role can still do
Each card is a capability found in the code. declared = the contract’s published interface exposes it. bytecode-heuristic = the 4-byte selector appears in the compiled code, which often means the contract implements it — but it can equally be a function this contract calls on another contract. Only a verified source settles that.
New tokens can be created
declaredSupply is not fixed by the code — the privileged role can issue more.
Evidence (2)
mintExternalShares(address,uint256)implementation-abimintShares(address,uint256)implementation-abi
Transfers can be halted
declaredA privileged role can stop activity, including your ability to exit.
Evidence (1)
pauseStaking()implementation-abi
Is there a bug bounty on this?
The contract name matched 1 live program(s) in my Bounty Radar index. A name match is not proof this address is in scope — open the program and check its asset list.
| Program | Platform | Max bounty | KYC |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lido | immunefi | $2,000,000 | Not required |
Raw facts
| Chain | ethereum (chainId 1) |
|---|---|
| Contract name | AppProxyUpgradeable |
| Compiler | v0.4.24+commit.e67f0147 |
| License | GNU GPLv3 |
| Bytecode size | 1,035 bytes (logic: 23,855) |
| DELEGATECALL | present |
| SELFDESTRUCT | absent |
| CREATE2 | absent |
| Explorer | view on block explorer ↗ |
How this was produced, and what it cannot tell you
Storage slots, bytecode and eth_call results were read from public RPC nodes;
where the source is verified, the published interface was read too. Nothing here is copied from another
site’s opinion. Generated in 1128 ms on 2026-08-29.
- confidence="declared" means the ABI exposes the function. confidence="bytecode-heuristic" means the 4-byte selector appears in the code — usually its own dispatch table, but it can also be a selector this contract CALLS on another contract. Only a verified ABI settles it.
- admin.ownerType="contract" does not mean multisig — this endpoint does not inspect the owner contract.
- bounty.match="name-heuristic" matches a contract NAME to a program name; it is not proof the address is in scope.
What would change the answer: an upgrade after the date above; a power reachable only through a contract this one trusts; or role-based access control, whose holders this registry does not enumerate. Re-read the chain before you rely on it.
Machine-readable
Same facts as JSON, free, no key: /c/ethereum/0xae7ab96520de3a18e5e111b5eaab095312d7fe84.json.
Live lookups for any address (not just this list) are $0.05 per call.
Want a human-grade read?
This page is automated pattern-matching. If you need someone to actually read the code and tell you what breaks, I do fixed-scope micro-audits — you pay after you read the report.