Know the code before you
commit the capital.
We give investment groups an independent, severity-rated read on the Solidity contracts behind a blockchain opportunity — so the technical risk is on the table before the wire goes out.
State updated after external call
Vault.sol · withdraw() · L142–148
A full read of the contract, not a checklist pass.
Every engagement looks past surface syntax to how the system actually behaves — where value moves, who holds control, and what can change after deployment.
See the full scope & coverage →Contract architecture
How contracts are structured and interact, where trust boundaries sit, and how value and authority flow through the system.
Access & permissions
Who can call privileged functions, how roles are assigned, and whether ownership and admin powers are appropriately constrained.
Upgradeability frameworks
Proxy patterns, storage layout, and upgrade authority — and what a future upgrade could change about funds already committed.
Token mechanics
Minting, transfers, fees, supply controls, and the incentive logic that governs how tokens and balances behave under stress.
Overall code quality
Adherence to established Solidity development standards, clarity, test coverage, and the maintainability that predicts future risk.
Best-practice alignment
Whether the contracts follow recognized cybersecurity standards and the conventions the security community treats as table stakes.
Every issue carries a severity. So you know what to act on first.
We classify each finding by its potential impact on users, assets, and protocol operations — the same scale that anchors the front page of the report.
Directly threatens user funds or protocol integrity. Exploitable conditions that can drain assets, freeze the contract, or seize control. Must be resolved before capital is exposed.
Serious risk to assets or core functionality under realistic conditions — often dependent on a specific actor, state, or sequence — that demands remediation before deployment.
Meaningful weaknesses that could cause harm in narrower circumstances, or compound with other issues. Should be fixed or consciously accepted with mitigations in place.
Limited-impact issues, deviations from best practice, and informational observations that improve robustness, clarity, and long-term maintainability.
Examine the contracts
We review the full scope — architecture, permissions, upgradeability, token mechanics, and quality — running comprehensive vulnerability testing and best-practice analysis against established standards.
Deliver the findings
You receive a detailed report summarizing every finding, its severity rating, and the reasoning behind it — written so both your technical advisors and your investment committee can act on it.
Recommend the fixes
Each finding comes with concrete, prioritized remediation steps — what to change, and why it matters — so the project team has a clear path to resolution.
Verify the resolution
After updates are implemented, we can conduct a follow-up review to confirm that identified issues have been properly addressed before you rely on the result.
Built for the groups deploying the capital.
Independent technical diligence for the investment organizations evaluating blockchain opportunities and decentralized applications.