What Should the Scope of the Web3 Audit Look Like?
summary
Argues that “audit” is misleading and recommends renaming it to code review or risk assessment, documents specific conflicts: community expects 100% secure stamp while auditors accept responsibility only for the exact contract lines they inspected, marketers overhype results, and there is no minimum checklist so anyone can call a quick scan an audit. Calls for unambiguous minimum scope of work and participation in the Ethereum Enterprise Alliance to define required checks and languages to be covered.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (6)
- 0:00Intro
- 0:22What should the Scope of the Web3 Audit look like
- 1:08What each of us provides shouldnt be named an audit
- 1:23Community expectations
- 2:12Whats minimum
- 3:35End
related talks
31mNeed of Web 3.0 Security
15mWhy Smart Contract Audit is Not Enough
44mWhat your auditor REALLY thinks but is afraid to tell you...
30mSmart-Contract Security 201: Auditing Lessons for Solana Founders
18mDAOnizing Web3 Security
35mDemystifying web application security
22mHackers Don't Care About Scope
36mDeciphering Web3 Security: Implications and Innovations