DeDust

Rejected venues wait the longest for re-review; a rejection has to earn another look before the scheduled date.

DeDust is a decentralised exchange on TON where returns come from supplying tokens to liquidity pools. Each pool holds two assets and rebalances against the market, so a price move in either one leaves the provider with less than holding would have. That impermanent loss is the mechanism behind our rejection of the whole AMM category: the client sees a loss they were never warned about, in a position we recommended. DeDust held about $4.51M on TON at the August 15, 2026 survey. The file reopens if the protocol ships a product without that exposure.

Kill criteria: the events that revoke this verdict
• Ships a product line without impermanent-loss exposure that merits its own review

The research file

Applicability to the surveyed record

DeDust documents a TON-native DEX whose volatile pools use the constant-product x*y=k invariant and whose stable pools use a two-reserve stableswap curve. A liquidity provider supplies both pool assets and receives LP tokens, while swaps change the two reserves. This directly establishes the v1 AMM-LP mechanism.

Current observation and perimeter

The DefiLlama protocol API read on 2026-08-15 classified DeDust as a DEX, reported only TON, and showed approximately $4.51M protocol TVL plus about $898,000 separately tagged as staking. Primary documentation and the mainnet factory identify the live settlement perimeter as TON.

Control and exit applicability

The Pool contract tracks asset0 and asset1 reserves and trade fees; asset-specific Vault contracts hold incoming inventory and execute pool payouts. LPs enter by transferring both target assets and exit by burning LP tokens, receiving the then-current quantities. Their result therefore depends on the path of pool trades, the invariant, contract execution, TON settlement and the liquidity of both returned assets.

Why the shared dossier decides

The shared v1 AMM-LP dossier controls because DeDust trading fees require two-asset reserve exposure whose composition changes against price moves. Reopen only for an economically separate DeDust product without AMM inventory, then review its mechanism, TON and asset dependencies, contracts and control, audits and incidents, executable liquidity, stressed exit and named non-AMM alternatives.

Sources

The claims above trace to these. Where a number could not be independently verified, the thesis says so.

• DeDust — protocol concepts · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: TON DEX, volatile pool, constant-product invariant, stable pool, two reserves, vault custody
• DeDust — liquidity provisioning · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: two-asset deposit, LP token, liquidity deposit contract, LP-token burn, withdrawal
• DeDust — Pool reference · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: asset0 and asset1, pool reserves, stable-pool flag, trade fee, swap output
• DeDust — mainnet factory · primary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: TON mainnet, factory contract, pool address, vault address
• DefiLlama — DeDust survey record · secondary · accessed 2026-08-15
  Supports: current TVL, TON-only perimeter, DEX category, staking tag

Inherited controls

The verdict above grades the protocol layer. Every position also inherits the asset it holds and the chain it settles on. The least safe layer sets the position’s grade, and the position table names which one that is.