Update on
@LynksOnSol.
Confirmed minting, backing deposits, marketplace sales, seller payments and LYNKS buy-and-burn on the current deployment. Redemption is verified on the earlier program.
We checked the receipt Lynks shared, traced the NFTs involved and examined the transaction history of the program used by the live website.
What the redemption receipt proves
The transaction supplied by
@LynksOnSol was finalized and successful.
It executed RedeemNftWithLimits, burned the NFT through Metaplex Core and returned exactly 1 backing token to the redeeming wallet.
We traced that same NFT back to its mint transaction, which deposited 1 token into the same reserve. On redemption, the reserve balance fell from 1 to 0, while the recipient’s balance increased by 1.
That is a confirmed redemption with matching NFT and token movements.
Proof:
explorer.solana.com/tx/RBcg3…
One distinction matters: this NFT followed mint → listing → cancellation → redemption. It was not the same NFT used in the marketplace-sale example from our previous review.
The current deployment
The redemption above used the earlier program:
2bG5zoarPpN6uHZz2azoih1Bp94ummt4aADnV7Y2Ls3A
The live website now uses:
DsxdELwZ5cFZaGScVzUnWsA8H1Xn2b2BoM8XP4Y6iFxU
We confirmed that the current program is executable on
@solana mainnet. Its upgrade authority remains active.
explorer.solana.com/address/…
What we verified on this program
We matched one NFT through its mint, listing and completed purchase.
At mint, the reserve received a net 10 backing tokens. The gross transfer was 10.101011 because the paired token charged a transfer fee.
The same transaction spent 0.01 SOL buying 13,313.638241 LYNKS through Raydium, then burned that exact amount.
Mint proof:
explorer.solana.com/tx/3Pzhe…
At purchase, the buyer paid 30 paired tokens. The seller received 29.7 after the token’s transfer fee, and the NFT moved to the buyer.
The transaction also spent another 0.01 SOL buying and burning 9,604.732981 solana:E8fsmahzoa4WGZ1dCnGBTzgXRxz9T7nC17KWGkzGxray.
Together, these two transactions burned 22,918.371222 solana:E8fsmahzoa4WGZ1dCnGBTzgXRxz9T7nC17KWGkzGxray.
Purchase proof:
explorer.solana.com/tx/b7FmV…
The remaining gap
We examined all 213 transaction receipts returned for the current program through September 21, 2026, 16:34:24 UTC.
They included 29 successful mints, one successful listing and one successful marketplace purchase. We found no RedeemNft or RedeemNftWithLimits instruction in that history.
Redemption on the earlier program is proven. Redemption on the current deployment remains unconfirmed by this review. That does not establish that the feature is unavailable or failing.
These transactions demonstrate execution. They do not establish organic demand, security or future token value. Different wallets alone do not prove unrelated users.
So,
@LynksOnSol has demonstrated every core function discussed in our initial review across the checked deployments: minting, reserve funding, marketplace sales, seller payments, redemption and solana:E8fsmahzoa4WGZ1dCnGBTzgXRxz9T7nC17KWGkzGxray buy-and-burn.
The remaining distinction is deployment-specific. We have verified redemption on the earlier program, while the current program has confirmed minting and marketplace activity.
LEANING LEGIT remains our assessment for the current deployment. A successful redemption on that program, with the NFT burn and backing-token return independently matched, would close the remaining core-function gap and support upgrading the functionality reviewed to LEGIT.
That would still describe demonstrated product functionality, not a security audit or a token recommendation.