Stablecoin Audit — A stablecoin audit reviews the mechanism that holds the peg — mint and redeem paths, collateral and reserve accounting, oracle inputs and the emergency levers — and stress-tests it against depeg scenarios, redemption pressure and adversarial arbitrage.
A stablecoin is a promise implemented in code. The audit question is what happens when the promise is tested: whether redemption remains honourable under pressure, whether the mint path can be gamed to create value, whether the collateral is priced by something an attacker can move, and whether the emergency levers can themselves be abused.
We review the accounting first, then the incentives, then the operations. That includes the exact rounding direction of every mint and redeem, what the peg logic does with a stale price, whether arbitrage actually restores the peg or accelerates the drain, and what a privileged actor can do with the blacklist, pause and parameter functions.
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, and the review focuses hard on the reflexive path: whether the stabilisation mechanism relies on a token whose value depends on the peg holding. We will state plainly if the design has a death-spiral condition.
Yes — simulated on a forked network across a range of collateral price moves and redemption volumes, reporting the point at which redemption stops being honourable.
We audit the on-chain accounting and the trust assumptions around the reported reserve figure. Verifying the reserve itself requires a financial attestation from an accounting firm — we will tell you exactly where our assurance ends.
We check that remote mint authority is bounded by locked collateral, that reconciliation is possible after an incident, and that no chain can inflate global supply independently.
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.