Hey devs 👋
I’ve been deep into building a smart contract-based project over the past couple months, and while most of the core logic is done, the next big hurdle is audits. I’ve done my best with tests, fuzzing, and even threw in some formal verification — but I know that’s not enough for production.
A couple questions I’ve been wrestling with:
-
How many of you are going with big-name audit firms vs smaller boutique teams (or even solo auditors)?
-
Is there such a thing as too early to bring in auditors?
-
Are you budgeting for multiple rounds of auditing, or doing one big pass and hoping for the best?
-
And for the open-source crowd: are you seeing any luck with community-driven audits or bug bounty programs?
Also — curious if anyone’s using tools like Slither, MythX, or Echidna regularly in their pipeline? I’ve dabbled, but wondering how reliable they really are for catching nuanced edge cases.
Would love to hear how others are thinking about (or struggling with) audit strategy. The pressure to ship is real, but I’m trying not to sacrifice security just to move fast.
Appreciate any war stories, tips, or tool recommendations 🙏
Totally feel you on this — walking the line between shipping fast and securing everything properly is one of the toughest parts of smart contract dev right now.
From my experience (and what I’ve seen across other teams), here’s how it's generally playing out:
Audit firms:
Big-name firms (like Trail of Bits, OpenZeppelin, Spearbit, etc.) are great for credibility, especially if you're planning a token launch or want investor confidence. But they’re expensive and often booked months in advance. Smaller boutique teams or well-known solo auditors can actually go deeper in some cases — more flexibility, sometimes more feedback. It really depends on your budget and risk tolerance.
When to bring in auditors:
You can bring them in too early — if your code is still evolving a lot, you’ll just burn money on feedback that’ll be outdated in a week. I usually aim for a full internal test + static analysis + fuzzing cycle before bringing in external auditors. Once the logic is stable, that’s the sweet spot.
One pass or multiple rounds?
Honestly, one audit pass is rarely enough. We usually do at least two — first for major vulnerabilities, then a follow-up after implementing fixes. If the project is big or handles serious funds, consider layering audits from different firms (or audit styles).
Community audits & bounties:
Bug bounties are definitely gaining traction — especially on platforms like Immunefi or HackenProof. Just make sure you structure the rewards clearly and have someone actively managing it. Community-driven audits can help surface stuff the firms miss, especially from a UX/security interaction standpoint.
On the tooling side:
-
Slither: Solid for basic static analysis. It’ll catch low-hanging fruit.
-
Echidna: Great for fuzzing edge cases, but has a learning curve. Worth investing time in if your contracts are complex.
-
MythX: Useful, though I’d say it’s better as part of a broader stack rather than a one-stop shop.
Also check out Foundry’s fuzzing capabilities — they’re getting really powerful.
Bottom line: audits are important, but security is more of a process than a checkbox. Test early, test often, and treat auditors like partners — not final gatekeepers.
Good luck with the launch! Always happy to trade notes if you want a second pair of eyes on anything 🔍
