A Cosmos smart contract audit is a security review of code deployed to Cosmos, carried out against the Cosmos SDK application chain execution model and written in Go / CosmWasm (Rust) — covering both the bug classes shared across Cosmos SDK / IBC systems and the failure modes specific to Cosmos.
A Cosmos chain is an application: the modules are the protocol. That means a keeper method with the wrong permission, or a BeginBlocker that panics on attacker-controlled state, is not a contract bug — it is a chain halt.
Cosmos SDK security work spans the module layer, IBC and CosmWasm contracts if the chain hosts them. The highest-severity findings are usually determinism failures and unbounded per-block work: anything that makes two honest nodes disagree, or that lets one account make block production expensive, threatens the chain rather than a contract.
We review module permissions and keeper boundaries, IBC packet and timeout handling, BeginBlocker and EndBlocker cost, upgrade handlers and migrations, and any CosmWasm contracts on top.
Cosmos runs on Cosmos SDK application chain, so it inherits the bug classes below from every system in that family.
Cosmos contracts are written in Go / CosmWasm (Rust). See our Go audit methodology.
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.
Both. Custom modules get a Go review focused on permissions, determinism and per-block cost; CosmWasm contracts get a Rust review focused on reply handling, migration authority and message flows.
Anything that halts the chain or breaks determinism — a panic on user input, or state that two nodes compute differently. Both are worse than most contract-level bugs.
Yes: packet handling, timeouts, refunds, acknowledgements and the trust assumptions of the channels you open.
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.