Can one person move the money in SushiSwap V3 Factory on Robinhood Chain? The authority score is 31 / 100 (weak): a small group with little delay.
In short. Factory.owner() is an Ownable2Step fee-manager wrapper whose owner is a plain 2-of-3 Safe - not found at the same address on Ethereum/Arbitrum/Base/BSC/Optimism, no public documentation of its signers found.
Exposure, not intent. The score counts what the keys could do, not what their holders will do, and says nothing about the odds of a loss. Re-read it yourself with a public RPC and curl: how.
Try a fix: drag the sliders Open the live dashboard re-read from the chain every 6 hours; this page is the snapshot of the build
| admin key | 50 |
|---|---|
| multisig | 35 |
| timelock | 0 |
| price feed | 100 |
| shared control | 100 |
Composite = 40% admin key + 30% multisig + 30% timelock, rounded. Price feed and shared control are read and shown, not folded in.
To move the money: 2 keys, 0 h to react, about $2M behind one key.
Factory.owner() is an Ownable2Step fee-manager wrapper whose owner is a plain 2-of-3 Safe - not found at the same address on Ethereum/Arbitrum/Base/BSC/Optimism, no public documentation of its signers found.
Factory and pools are immutable, so the blast radius is fee/tier control, not fund custody. Address sourced from Sushi’s own canonical chain config, not a third-party mirror.
Exit window: none: a change applies at once, the time a user has to leave after a harmful change is queued.
If a market used the example policy today (src/ExampleConsumer.sol: revert when stale, 0 under 60, 50% to 80% above): collateral factor 0 (score 31 is under MIN_SAFE_SCORE 60). Cheapest path to moderate (40): admin key from 50 to 73, that is a stronger admin setup (admin power spread beyond one key, or checked by others), every other axis unchanged. This is the smallest step into the next band, not a fix for the weakness: the first requirement not met is At least a 3-of-5 multisig (too few people need to agree).
[](https://realspap.github.io/oracle/p/robinhood-0xe51960f1b45f1c9fb6d166e6a884f866fc70433b.html)
A live badge: the score is read from the published watch files every time the page that shows it loads. Change nothing but your own repository.
Money behind it: $4M (DefiLlama), of which $3M sits exposed to this setup (TVL × (100 − score) / 100, a weight, not a prediction).
Contract: 0xe51960f1b45f1c9fb6d166e6a884f866fc70433b on the explorer ↗. Score pushed on-chain on 2026-10-13; stale on the oracle when older than 9 days (the watch re-reads it anyway). Read the score yourself: getScore(0xe51960f1b45f1c9fb6d166e6a884f866fc70433b) on the Robinhood Chain oracle, listed in the repository.
Read at block 136039274, methodology 0x667dc486af9557a8…. The score reads the authority path (keys, multisigs, timelocks, roles, price feeds); it does not audit the code for bugs, and it measures exposure, not the chance of being hit (see the backtest in the repository). Dispute this score with evidence, or read this page as JSON.
Admin Safe activity: the Safe 0x6fa4…4657 has executed 13 transactions (this watch has read that number since 2026-10-10; it has not seen it move). A Safe idle for 14 days or more that executes again, with money behind it, is an alert.
Read live: admin: Safe 2-of-3 behind a bare contract; delay: none.
Independent read of the admin: a contract 0xefbce7a9…5239 via owner() -> owner() of the holder (safe 2-of-3), consistent with the published admin-key score. Unchanged since 2026-10-10. Behind the holder, its owner() is a Safe 2-of-3: that is the hand. The attacker's question: 2 keys move this contract, no delay to react, $2M behind each key (the protocol's TVL, not this contract's balance). (scripts/second_opinion.py: a reader that shares nothing with the scorer, re-run every 6 hours)
Score unchanged since its publication on 2026-10-13; every later move will be a line of the hash-chained log. Methodology changed on 2026-10-13: points before that date come from another method and are not comparable.
# owner() on the contract: the holder
curl -s -X POST https://rpc.mainnet.chain.robinhood.com -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"eth_call","params":[{"to":"0xe51960f1b45f1c9fb6d166e6a884f866fc70433b","data":"0x8da5cb5b"},"0x55508a0"]}'Each answer is a 32-byte word (an address sits in its last 20 bytes); the admin path is the one scripts/second_opinion.py reports for this contract. read between blocks 89458462 and 89458848 of the chain
Follow this contract: Atom feed of its score moves, alerts and queued operations (nothing else).
curl -s -X POST https://rpc.testnet.chain.robinhood.com/rpc -H 'content-type: application/json' -d '{"jsonrpc":"2.0","id":1,"method":"eth_call","params":[{"to":"0x9BF45734D09bC7CA39238e767B2af9AAc62a7f52","data":"0xd47875d0000000000000000000000000e51960f1b45f1c9fb6d166e6a884f866fc70433b"},"latest"]}'The 6th 32-byte word of the answer is the composite score (31 = 0x1f); the 7th is the push timestamp. This RPC cannot replay the block of the build (it ignores the block tag, or no longer serves old state), so the value is the current one: compare the composite and the push timestamp with this page.