Service / Web3
Security reviews that cover keys, not just code.
Manual review, fuzzing and operational security review of contracts, programs and the keys and infrastructure around them, with fixes verified, not just reported.
[ 01 ]The short answer
What is Smart Contract Security Audit?
A smart contract audit is an expert review of onchain code for vulnerabilities before and after deployment. Code review alone is no longer enough: in 2026 most stolen value went through compromised private keys, weak multisig and verifier setups and governance shortcuts. Our reviews cover the code with manual analysis, static analysis and fuzzing, and the operational layer: who holds which keys, how upgrades and parameter changes happen, what is monitored, and how fast you can respond.
What you get
- Findings report with severity and proof of concept
- Fix review and final report
- Invariant and fuzz suites you keep
- Operational security recommendations
- Monitoring and alert rules
[ 02 ]What we build
The pieces, built to last.
- 01
Manual code review
Line-by-line review by engineers who build protocols, focused on value flows and trust boundaries.
- 02
Automated analysis
Slither, Aderyn, Semgrep rules and symbolic execution to catch known classes fast.
- 03
Fuzz and invariant testing
Properties written for your protocol and run against millions of random sequences.
- 04
Key and governance review
Multisig thresholds, signer devices, timelocks, upgrade paths and emergency powers.
- 05
Infrastructure review
Bridges, oracles, RPC dependencies and frontends: the parts recent exploits went through.
- 06
Fix verification
We re-review every fix and confirm the final deployed bytecode matches what was reviewed.
[ 03 ]Where it pays off
Where it earns its keep.
- 01
Pre-launch audits
Before mainnet, with time planned for fixes.
- 02
Upgrade reviews
Every upgrade reviewed as a diff against the audited version.
- 03
Due diligence
For investors, exchanges and integrators deciding whether to trust a protocol.
- 04
Incident response
Fast triage, containment and post-mortem when something has gone wrong.
[ 04 ]How we deliver
Four steps, one team, start to finish.
The same people scope it, build it and stay after launch. Timings are typical for a first release; we agree yours after the deep dive.
- 01Week 1
Threat model and spec
Who can move money, under what conditions, and what happens when a key, an oracle or a bridge fails. Written down before code.
- 02Weeks 2 to 8
Build with invariants
Contracts or programs with unit, fuzz and invariant tests, least-privilege roles, timelocks and rate limits from the first commit.
- 03Weeks 6 to 10
Review and testnet
Internal review, an independent audit where value is at stake, and a public testnet with monitoring wired in.
- 04Ongoing
Mainnet and watch
A staged launch with caps, live alerting on admin actions and outflows, and a rehearsed incident plan.
[ 05 ]Stack
Tools we reach for.
Chosen per project, and we work in yours. Nothing here is a lock-in: you own the code and the accounts.
- Slither
- Aderyn
- Echidna
- Medusa
- Foundry
- Halmos
- Certora
- Semgrep
- Trident
- cargo-fuzz
- Tenderly
[ 06 ]Further reading
Problems we found, and how we would solve them.
- DeFi security3 min read
In 2026, DeFi lost more to keys than to code
ProblemMost stolen value now flows through compromised private keys, thin multisigs, single-verifier bridges and governance powers with no delay, which a code audit does not cover.ProposalAssume a key will be stolen: split and timelock admin powers, rate-limit outflows, delay collateral listings, require several independent verifiers, and wire monitoring that can pause before the treasury empties.Read the proposal - Due diligence3 min read
What can this contract do to your money?
ProblemAnswering whether an owner can mint, freeze, change fees or upgrade means reading dozens of files behind a proxy; scanners give unexplained yes or no flags and chatbots lose the context.ProposalIndex the verified source with Solidity-aware chunking, follow proxies to the real implementation, combine deterministic detectors with hybrid retrieval, and answer only with line-level citations.Read the proposal - Wallet security3 min read
One signature, every asset: the EIP-7702 delegation trap
ProblemA single EIP-7702 authorization routes every future call from an account to delegate code; phishing sites disguise it, and early analysis found most mainnet delegations pointed at copy-pasted sweeper contracts.ProposalTreat delegation as the most dangerous signature a wallet asks for: allowlist audited delegate contracts, show the target in plain language, simulate effects, scope permissions with session keys, and make revocation one tap.Read the proposal
[ 07 ]FAQ
Questions buyers ask.
No audit can. It reduces risk within its scope and time. That is why we also review keys and infrastructure, leave you with tests, and recommend monitoring and bug bounties.
Yes, Anchor and native Rust programs, including account validation, PDA seeds, CPI and signer checks.
Yes. For quick checks of third-party contracts we also build tools that answer what a contract can do to your funds, cited to the code.
[ 08 ]More Web3 services
- Smart Contract DevelopmentContracts that do exactly what they promise.
- Solana Program DevelopmentSub-second apps on the fastest major chain.
- dApp DevelopmentOnchain apps people actually enjoy using.
- DeFi Protocol DevelopmentFinancial protocols that survive real markets.
- Real-World Asset TokenizationAssets that settle in minutes, not days.
- Stablecoin and Crypto PaymentsGlobal payments that settle in seconds.
- Wallets and Account AbstractionSelf-custody without the seed-phrase pain.
- Layer 2, Rollup and Appchain DevelopmentYour own chain, when you really need one.
- Cross-Chain and InteroperabilityOne product across every chain your users use.
- Zero-Knowledge Proof DevelopmentProve it without revealing it.
- Onchain AI Agents and Agent PaymentsAgents that can earn, pay and be trusted.
One company at a time