A smart contract is adversarial software running on a public network where every line is readable and every bug is a standing bounty for whoever finds it first. There is no patch-on-Tuesday for a deployed contract holding funds — the cost of being wrong is immediate and often total. That is why security is not the last step of on-chain work here; it is the whole job.
This is a security audit written by engineers who have lived on both sides of an exploit. The founder rebuilt this practice on the far side of a DeFi hack — the posture here is lived, not borrowed from a checklist.
From $3,999 · scoped per audit
A written threat model first
Before a line of the contract is read for bugs, we write down what it is defending and against whom: the assets at risk, the trust assumptions, the privileged roles, the upgrade paths, and the external protocols it composes on. An audit without a threat model is just spellcheck; the model is what tells us where to look hardest.
This is also where we catch the design-level problems that no line-by-line pass will surface — an economic incentive that can be gamed, an oracle that can be manipulated, an access-control model that concentrates too much power in one key.
Line by line, against the known failure modes
We reason through the whole catalogue of on-chain failure: reentrancy, integer and rounding errors, oracle and price manipulation, MEV exposure, front-running, flashloan-amplified attacks, unchecked external calls, access-control gaps, and unsafe upgrade or proxy patterns. Each is checked against the specific contract, not waved at generically.
Findings come back ranked by severity and exploitability, each with a concrete remediation and, where useful, a proof-of-concept that demonstrates the issue is real rather than theoretical.
Key management is part of the architecture
Most real-world losses are not exotic contract bugs — they are keys. Who holds them, how they are stored, what a single compromised signer can do, whether the multisig thresholds actually reflect the trust model. We treat key management as a first-class part of the review, because an immaculate contract behind a single hot key is not secure.
A report you can act on and show
You receive a written report: the threat model, the findings by severity, the remediations, and a clear statement of what was and was not in scope. It is designed to be read by your team, shown to your own stakeholders, and re-checked after you fix what it found — we re-review remediations as part of the engagement.
We do not stamp what we did not verify, and we do not pretend an audit is a guarantee. What we deliver is a rigorous, defensible read of your on-chain risk by senior engineers who take it as seriously as you do.