AVS Audit — An AVS audit reviews Actively Validated Services and the restaking layer beneath them — slashing conditions, operator set management, the cryptoeconomic security budget and the correctness of the task-verification logic — to establish whether the service is actually secured by the stake it claims.
Restaking creates a new failure mode: the same stake securing several services at once, where a correlated failure or an aggressive slashing condition can cascade. On top of that, AVS designs frequently assume a security budget without checking whether the cost of corrupting the operator set is genuinely higher than the value at risk.
We review the slashing logic for both directions of failure — honest operators being slashed, dishonest ones escaping — the task verification and dispute process, operator set management, and the actual cryptoeconomic maths: what it costs to corrupt the service versus what corrupting it is worth.
We fix a commit hash, agree the in-scope contracts and read your architecture docs, then build a threat model: who the actors are, what the trust boundaries are, and which invariants must never break. Nothing is reviewed against assumptions we have not written down.
Line-by-line review by at least two auditors working independently, focused on authorisation, accounting, upgrade paths, external integrations and the gap between what the code does and what the documentation claims it does. Most critical findings come from this phase, not from tooling.
Static analysers appropriate to the language, plus property-based fuzzing and invariant testing to push the system into states no unit test covers. Tooling is used to widen coverage, never to replace the manual pass.
Candidate findings are proven on a forked network with a working proof of concept. We report what an attacker can actually do and what it costs them, not a theoretical severity label.
Every finding gets a severity rating, reproduction steps, the affected code, the impact in concrete terms and a specific remediation. You get a draft for discussion before anything is finalised.
We re-test every remediation against the original proof of concept and check that the fix has not opened a new path. The final report is yours to publish.
| Severity | What it means |
|---|---|
| Critical | Direct loss of funds or permanent freezing of assets, exploitable by any actor. |
| High | Loss of funds or protocol insolvency under realistic conditions, or requiring a privileged actor to misbehave. |
| Medium | Broken protocol behaviour, denial of service, or value leakage that does not directly drain the contract. |
| Low | Edge-case incorrectness with limited impact, or an issue requiring implausible preconditions. |
| Informational | Code quality, gas efficiency, documentation mismatch and defence-in-depth suggestions. |
Single token contract: starts from $999, report in 24–48 hours. dApp, GameFi or RWA project: starts from $2,999. DeFi protocol, L2 / rollup, Bridge, ZK circuit, AI agent / MCP: scoped per project after we have seen the code.
Yes. We compute what it costs to corrupt the operator set against the value your service protects. If corruption is cheaper than the prize, no amount of correct code fixes it.
In both directions: we try to trigger slashing against an honest operator, and we try to misbehave in a way that avoids slashing. Both are findings.
We model it explicitly, because shared stake means one operator mistake can cascade. This is the risk restaking introduces that ordinary staking does not have.
Yes — whether verification genuinely proves the work, whether disputes are practical to raise and win, and whether the challenge economics make honest challenging worthwhile.
A repository or contract address, a commit hash to freeze the scope, whatever architecture or spec documentation exists, and a point of contact who can answer design questions. If documentation is thin we will write our understanding of the system back to you and ask you to confirm it — that step alone catches design-level bugs.
A single token contract is 24–48 hours. A typical dApp or mid-sized protocol runs one to two weeks. Large DeFi systems, L2s, bridges and ZK circuits are scoped per project after we have seen the code. We will give you a fixed timeline with the quote, not an estimate that moves.
Yes. Fix review is part of the engagement, not an upsell. We re-run the original proof of concept against your patched code and confirm the fix has not introduced a new path.
Send the repository and a commit hash through the contact form, message @bugtester25 on Telegram, or book a 30-minute scoping call. 200+ protocols audited · $4B+ secured · 0 hacks post-audit. Prefer email? info@safeedges.in.