Skip to main content

Sentrix Security Audit Summary

Last updated: 2026-04-28

This document is the navigation hub for security material on Sentrix Chain. It is intended for:

  • External auditors performing diligence
  • Listing platforms (CG, CMC, exchanges)
  • Researchers reviewing the chain's security posture
  • Future contributors picking up the codebase cold

For technical detail, see the dedicated documents:

Specialized audits

In addition to the numbered code-review rounds, several topical audits have been run:

TopicDateStatus
BFT consensus engine2026-04-20Reviewed; bugs found + fixed (BFT skip-round, justification-set divergence)
EVM integration & gas accounting2026-04-22Reviewed; reverted-tx state-leak bug fixed (PR #281), gas-cap EIP-7825 alignment fixed (v2.1.46)
Dependency supply chain2026-04-21cargo audit clean; CI runs cargo audit + gitleaks on every PR
CI/cd security posture2026-04-21Reviewed; secret-scanning + signed-commit verification active
Validator infrastructure security2026-04-21Reviewed; SSH-key custody, validator host hardening documented in operator runbooks
Tokenomics correctness2026-04-25Reviewed; supply invariants hold across all forks
BFT skip-round root cause2026-04-28Phase 2 RCA documented in operator runbooks

External audit posture

No third-party audit firm has reviewed Sentrix Chain code as of 2026-04-28. External audit is something we'd pursue when budget + scope align — no committed timeline.

The chain runs continuous internal review:

  • cargo audit + gitleaks on every PR
  • slither + mythril on Solidity contracts (CI gate)
  • Manual code review by the internal Sentrix Labs / SentrisCloud security team for every PR
  • Public bug bounty: see security.md (safe-harbor policy in effect)

Listing platforms or external auditors performing diligence: contact [email protected] for code-walkthrough or audit-prep discussion.

How to report

If you find a security issue:

  1. Do not open a public GitHub issue.
  2. Email [email protected] with details.
  3. Include reproduction steps, impact assessment, and suggested fix if applicable.
  4. We acknowledge within 48 hours; remediation timeline depends on severity.
  5. Safe-harbor policy applies — researchers acting in good faith are protected from legal action; see security.md for full terms.

Cross-references