Blockchain security research and risk intelligence
Advanced blockchain security research, smart contract auditing, formal verification and continuous risk intelligence for the next generation of decentralized systems.
Six layers where decentralised systems fail, and where Quantix looks.
Layer 3 of 6
Smart contracts
On-chain code that holds value and enforces the protocol’s rules.
Quantix coverage
Security intelligence
Largest Quantix Risk Index movements in the latest month
53 recorded contracts · 7 open alerts
Security Intelligence Overview
Quantix Intelligence coverage, data through October 2026
Protocol Security Index
Mean Quantix Risk Index
Protocols in scope
12 with research assessments
Research assessments
Completed in the last 12 months
Security findings
5 critical, 21 high in period
Remediation progress
Resolved or accepted, all findings
Protocols by risk tier; select a tier to list them
Findings by vulnerability class in the period
Protocols per ecosystem; select to filter
Reported per month, by assessment completion
| Category | Critical | High | Medium | Low | Informational |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Dec | 0 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Jan | 1 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 |
| Feb | 0 | 2 | 3 | 2 | 1 |
| Mar | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Apr | 0 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
| May | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 0 |
| Jun | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Jul | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Aug | 2 | 8 | 11 | 7 | 5 |
| Sept | 0 | 4 | 5 | 2 | 2 |
| Oct | 1 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 1 |
Research assessments completed per month
| Category | Assessments |
|---|---|
| Nov | 0 |
| Dec | 1 |
| Jan | 1 |
| Feb | 1 |
| Mar | 0 |
| Apr | 1 |
| May | 1 |
| Jun | 0 |
| Jul | 0 |
| Aug | 4 |
| Sept | 2 |
| Oct | 1 |
Remediation progress by severity
ResolvedAcknowledgedPartially resolvedOpen
ArchiveQuantix Protocol Research, as of 24 October 2026About this dataProtocol analytics from connected data
Platform
01
Manual review backed by static analysis, fuzzing and formal methods, from the first commit to the deployed bytecode.
02
Protocol risk scored on six weighted components, with the history, evidence and coverage behind every number.
03
Rules written around each protocol’s own risk model: privileged calls, upgrades, governance and the patterns that precede an attack.
04
Fund flows traced hop by hop, with observed facts, provider signals and inferences kept apart and attribution stated only when confirmed.
05
Technical security assessments with scope, threat model, methodology and every finding written out, from severity to verified fix.
06
Long-form research on how decentralised systems fail, from vault share-price manipulation to under-constrained circuits.
Security capabilities
Manual, line-by-line review of contract code, supported by static analysis and targeted testing. We assess what the code does against what the protocol intends it to do.
Precise specifications of the properties a system must preserve, checked with automated provers and model checkers. Useful where a single violated invariant would be catastrophic.
Authorised, scoped testing of the applications and infrastructure that surround on-chain code: frontends, APIs, wallets, signing services and cloud environments.
Monitoring designed around your protocol’s own risk model: privileged operations, upgrades, treasury movements and transaction patterns that precede known attack classes.
Structured technical support during and after a security incident: transaction reconstruction, on-chain tracing, root-cause analysis and containment recommendations.
Research on how attacks against decentralised systems are prepared and executed, delivered as briefings, indicators and detection logic your team can act on.
Address classification, exposure analysis and transaction-flow investigation for teams that must understand where funds come from and where they go.
Methodology design and technical review for proof-of-reserves programmes: asset attestation, liability commitments with Merkle trees, and on-chain balance analysis.
Architecture review, threat modelling and security planning for teams designing new protocols, migrating systems, or preparing for an audit.
Trust & methodology
Every engagement follows the same seven stages and ends in a written record. Methods are mapped to public standards so reviewers can trace them; alignment is stated, certification is not claimed.
The assessment process, from scope to final report.
Public frameworks the methods are mapped to. Mapping is not certification.
Technical coverage, not partnerships.
Ecosystem coverage
Layer 1, proof of stake
Listed to describe technical specialisation. It does not indicate a partnership with the network or its foundation.
Ethereum protocols in the explorerOur approach
An assessment describes a system at one commit. Protocols keep changing after that day, so research, verification, remediation and monitoring feed one another in a loop.
Security starts with the code that ships, read line by line before release rather than after an exploit. Every in-scope line is reviewed and the assumptions it encodes are tested.
Research & intelligence
Technical analysis · Threat Intelligence
Many exploits are preceded by preparation that is visible on-chain: funding, deployment, rehearsal. A structured look at the signals, how far each can be trusted, and how to turn them into detection rules.
Threat Intelligence8 min read
DeFi Security6 min read
Smart Contract Vulnerabilities8 min read
Incident Analysis6 min read
Across all Quantix research assessments
Share the system you are building, where it runs and when it ships. The first output of every engagement is a written scope you can hold us to.
