There are always some cases in the crypto world that suddenly bring seemingly distant risks right to your doorstep.

One such experience involved a wallet. The user bought PEPE for $27—at that time, this token was almost ignored, with a price so low it was negligible. Unexpectedly, time passed, and this investment in the account was valued at $67 million. Yes, a number that can change a life.

But here’s the shocking twist: he couldn’t withdraw it. Not a single cent.

Why? The answer lies in the smart contract code. The contract for this token granted the developer a privilege—permanently blacklisting any address. It sounds absurd, but it’s that simple and brutal. Your wallet on the chain shows seven-figure assets, but once frozen, it becomes just a string of useless numbers. The developer doesn’t even need to delete your assets; with a single operation, your ownership is effectively nullified.

This isn’t an isolated incident. Similar stories are common in the Meme coin space—those DOGE imitators, and various newly launched “next hundred-bagger” tokens, many of which have backdoors like this in their contracts.

This exposes a fundamental question: what is true asset ownership?

In the world of cryptocurrencies, the answer has two layers. The first layer: you must control the private key. That’s basic—if you hold the private key, the assets are yours. But that’s not enough. The second, more hidden and deadly layer: you need to understand what the smart contract allows and prohibits. If the contract’s creator has reserved privileged functions—freeze, blacklist, unlimited minting—then the ownership on paper is just an illusion. You are not the true owner of these tokens; you are merely borrowing a number from someone else’s ledger.

This is the biggest trap of Meme coins. Small projects that haven’t been audited, claiming “community governance,” but fundamentally centralized control. The story of getting rich quick is tempting, but the cost might be handing your money over to a stranger you’ve never met, and praying they won’t regret it.

What should you do? There are just a few key points:

First, check whether the token’s contract code has passed an authoritative security audit. Not all audits are reliable, but at least someone has professionally reviewed the code. Second, read the contract yourself—especially those with special permissions. Functions for freezing, blacklisting, minting—these must be thoroughly examined. Lastly, ask yourself a critical question: am I investing in a truly decentralized community consensus, or gambling on a game that can be controlled by a single point of authority?

Asset security ultimately depends on two things: absolute transparency of the code, and genuine decentralized operation. Any “promise” from others—whether from the project team or community leaders—is unreliable.

This story of $27 turning into $67 million is really asking each participant: when wealth and risk are so closely intertwined, what will your choice be?