Status
What exists instead
A written threat model
A written threat model
docs/SECURITY_MODEL.md enumerates assets, actors, and trust boundaries, then works through five named adversaries: a hostile or compromised executor, a hostile relayer on the order path, a hostile router, a hostile guardian quorum, and a hostile frontend.It also carries sections titled “Residual risks — accepted, not solved”, “Known gaps”, and “What this does not protect against.”Defence in depth on the limits that matter
Defence in depth on the limits that matter
Execution rate limits are enforced in both the contract and the executor service, on the explicit reasoning that a limit living in one layer disappears when that layer has a bug.
Automated test coverage on the security-relevant paths
Automated test coverage on the security-relevant paths
The read-only guarantee on the MCP surface is asserted by a test rather than documented as an intention. Hash canonicalisation has cross-language parity vectors and a cross-runtime check.
An internal security review
An internal security review
A structured internal audit was performed against the deployed surfaces. Its principal finding — that the dashboard API carries no authentication layer — is documented rather than quietly fixed, because for the public endpoints it is intended, and for the self-hosted surface the mitigation is the operator’s
tunnel_token.An internal review is not an independent test. It shares the authors’ blind spots by construction, which is the specific thing a third-party engagement buys.
What a buyer should require
If you are evaluating this for anything carrying real capital, ask for these rather than accepting the above as equivalent:1
A smart-contract audit before enabling execution
The contracts enforce the caps that make the system non-custodial. That code is the highest-value target and the least forgiving of error.
2
A test against YOUR deployment, not a vendor's
Because Scienter is self-hosted, your instance’s exposure is a function of how you deployed it. A vendor’s report about a vendor’s host would not describe your risk.
3
Confirmation that the tunnel token is set
The single highest-impact misconfiguration available. Verify it directly rather than assuming.
When reports exist
Completed reports will be summarised here with scope, date, methodology, findings by severity, and remediation status. Full reports will be available under NDA rather than published, which is the normal arrangement — but the summary belongs in public, because a security page that only says “we were audited” is not a claim anyone can evaluate.Scienter publishes impersonal market signals of general and regular circulation. Nothing here is investment, legal, or tax advice, or a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any asset. Scienter is not a registered investment adviser or broker-dealer. Trading digital assets can result in the total loss of your funds — see Disclaimers for the full text.