Digital market intelligence
First Edition · Original explainers · Historical examples
Home / Asset library / LIT
No whitepaper found

Litentry

LIT · Litentry

UtilityPays for identity services on the Litentry network.

What it is

Litentry is a decentralized identity aggregation protocol that links user identities across networks, letting fragmented on-chain and off-chain identity data flow across systems while preserving privacy and data sovereignty. (Note: the LIT ticker is shared with Lighter, a newer perps DEX; this entry covers Litentry, the identity protocol.)

Technology & consensus

A DID indexing protocol plus a distributed DID-validation blockchain built with Substrate. Identity verification jobs aggregate data from multiple sources, compute identity scores with a proprietary weighting algorithm, and encrypt data for privacy; a Verifiable Random Function (VRF) selects validators for identity verification.

Token utility

LIT fuels network operations, incentivizes validators/identity stakers, and supports governance mechanisms letting holders influence project decisions.

Key risks & notes

Research-access caveat: the official whitepaper (litentry.com/en/whitepaper, plus an official lightpaper) could not be fetched, so this summary is drawn from its contents as quoted in exchange research. Risks: the decentralized-identity niche has seen slow adoption, the project depends on the Substrate/Polkadot ecosystem, and ticker confusion with Lighter's LIT creates market-identity risk.

Primary source

No whitepaper found. The summary below is drawn from the project’s official documentation, site, or repository instead — the substitution is disclosed, not hidden.

Research status

Classification: No whitepaper found · Researched · Source material: official project documents only.

Machine-readable summary →

👁️ Evidence dossier

Verification classClass AFORA-01 scale — verification, not a quality ranking
Claim type · Utility / gas token
What does the holder own?

Title, redemption claim, fractional ownership, reserve exposure — or just narrative.

LIT was the utility and governance token of Litentry, a decentralized identity-aggregation protocol on a Substrate-based network. Holders used LIT for network transaction fees, governance proposals and voting, staking to support network security, and paying for identity-related services. In January 2025 the project rebranded to Heima Network with a new HEI token; legacy LIT migrates 1:1 to HEI via an official swap portal (max supply 100 million for both). Caution: an unrelated LIT — the Lighter Infrastructure Token of a perps DEX, launched December 2025 — now shares the ticker; this dossier covers Litentry's legacy LIT only.

high confidence

Evidence: [1] · [2] · [3]

Verified
Who holds the underlying?

Needs an identifiable custodian or entity — not a wallet address or a label.

No underlying asset exists behind LIT by design. Project and exchange documentation classify LIT as a utility token for fees, incentives, governance, and identity services; no reserves, collateral, or custodied assets backing the token are claimed or evidenced.

high confidence

Evidence: [1]

Verified
How are reserves checked?

Custodian records → inventory → third-party audit → supply reconciliation.

No reserves exist behind LIT to check. The 100 million maximum supply is enforced by the legacy ERC-20 and BEP-20 contracts (0xb59490aB09A0f526Cc7305822aC65f2Ab12f9723), whose supply and transfers are auditable on Etherscan and BscScan; new HEI contracts (audited by SlowMist) mirror the same max supply.

high confidence

Evidence: [1] · [2]

Verified
How does redemption work?

Eligibility, minimums, fees, KYC, settlement — and what happens to the token.

No redemption for underlying value exists or was ever promised. The only project-provided exit is the 1:1 LIT-to-HEI token swap through the official swap portal, stated to remain available after the rebrand. This is a token migration, not a redemption; legacy LIT liquidity has largely dried up as trading volume moved to HEI, so holders relying on market sale face a deprecated asset.

medium confidence

Evidence: [1] · [2]

Verified
Who is liable if redemption fails?

A legally accountable entity and jurisdiction — not a DAO label.

No redemption obligation exists, so no entity is liable for redemption failure. The Heima team operates the LIT-to-HEI migration portal, but it is a convenience mechanism, not a liability-bearing guarantee; legacy LIT holders bear the risk that the deprecated token becomes illiquid or unsupported by exchanges.

medium confidence

Evidence: [1] · [2]

Verified

❔ UNVERIFIED means not yet researched — not disproven. Rows marked “researched” were investigated and independent evidence was not found. Coverage expands as FORTUNA verifies. This dossier was researched 2026-09-15. Method: FORA-01 Asset Claim Verification Protocol.

❔ Frequently asked questions

What is Litentry (LIT)?

Litentry is a decentralized identity aggregation protocol that links user identities across networks, letting fragmented on-chain and off-chain identity data flow across systems while preserving privacy and data sovereignty. (Note: the LIT ticker is shared with Lighter, a newer perps DEX; this entry covers Litentry, the identity protocol.)

What does the holder own?

LIT was the utility and governance token of Litentry, a decentralized identity-aggregation protocol on a Substrate-based network. Holders used LIT for network transaction fees, governance proposals and voting, staking to support network security, and paying for identity-related services. In January 2025 the project rebranded to Heima Network with a new HEI token; legacy LIT migrates 1:1 to HEI via an official swap portal (max supply 100 million for both). Caution: an unrelated LIT — the Lighter Infrastructure Token of a perps DEX, launched December 2025 — now shares the ticker; this dossier covers Litentry's legacy LIT only.

What is Litentry's verification status?

Litentry (LIT) carries verification class A (Class A): every applicable FORA-01 question is VERIFIED — a full verification chain. What would change it: A status change would require new evidence — a status never changes from reinterpreting old evidence.

← Back to the asset library