@CertiK Grateful to @CertiK for the recognition and for the opportunity to contribute through responsible security research.
I continue to work across Web3, application security, and protocol security.
My public research and technical work:
https://t.co/zSghmt6fyn
@theBliz_@immunefi The full report and 3 reproducible PoCs are already in submission #84535. Mediation costs another $250 after the $50 submission fee. Are you saying researchers must pay $300 before Immunefi reviews a report closed as spam for being “complex”?
@immunefi How can submission #84535, backed by three reproducible PoCs on a mainnet fork, require a $50 fee and then be closed as spam without technical review by the protocol, simply because it was considered “complex”? Is this acceptable triage?
@0xtruthlover Hackenproof is an amateurish platform with zero transparency toward researchers; everything is labeled "informational" or "out of scope," and when a finding is actually valid, it gets downgraded without justification.
@v4rvl@HackenProof The confusion is because my first report, DPSC-456, was submitted before DPSC-473, but it was closed for formatting reasons.
I resubmitted the same valid issue as DPSC-477, and they closed it as duplicate of DPSC-473, which came after my original report.
After asking @HackenProof to prove an earlier valid report existed, I was timed out for 24h in their Discord.
Still no proof.
DPSC-456: May 29
DPSC-473: June 6
A later report should not override an earlier valid submission.
Amateurish platform behavior.
A question for Web3 projects handling user funds:
Why not launch a public bug bounty program on @CertiK?
Audits are important, but continuous external review is what helps catch critical bugs before attackers do.
Clear scope, fair rewards, better security.
Em junho do ano passado, fiz meu maior lucro em menos de 24h numa pool de alto risco. Foram 7h numa memecoin scam, extraindo taxas em meio a volume absurdo. Resultado: +$990 no pico, 30 min antes do rug. Timing, gestão de risco e saída rápida. Já viram algo perto disso?
#Defi
Node Runner Season One is over. Here are a few highlights:
- Total Node Runners: 560,000+
- Quests completed: 2 million+
- Points distributed: 15 billion+
- Glyphs minted: 765,000+
When we looked at consistent uptime — the metric that truly separates node runners from spectators — a clear winner emerged.
Crew ACK, leveraging its high percentage of Validator/Node Operator runners, demonstrated unparalleled endurance and technical stability.
ACK: Led the daily uptime ranking for 14 out of the 21 days of the Gridcrew competition, accumulating 333 hours as the leader (68.66%).
FIN: Showed strong operational discipline, holding the top spot for 151 hours.
SYN: SYN led the daily rankings for only one single hour across the entire competition, holding the top spot for zero full days.
Congrats to the ACK crew and thanks to all Node Runners for participating.
Gridcrews team medal images and videos are now listed in the Gridcrews Finale collection. You can mint yours (or all of them, if you prefer) to commemorate Season 1: https://t.co/igyarR1FUh
Stay tuned for more details about the future of Gridcrews soon.