Provider directory · Technical review not assessed
Hacken
Review the source evidence before requesting a proposal. Confirm that the assigned team, scope and deliverables match your project.
Official provider website
Evidence and engagement scope
Source check: . A provider statement is attributed information. A confirmed field refers only to the cited artifact.
- Audit networks
- Ethereum, Solana, Polygon, NEAR, Avalanche, Arbitrum, Optimism, TON, Cosmos, AptosProvider statement · Checked 2026-09-05. Stated on the provider website; scope must be agreed for each engagement. Source for audit networks
- Audit languages
- Solidity, Rust, MoveProvider statement · Checked 2026-09-05. Stated on the provider website; scope must be agreed for each engagement. Source for audit languages
- Services and methods
- Smart contract audit, Penetration testingProvider statement · Checked 2026-09-05. Stated on the provider website; scope must be agreed for each engagement. Source for services and methods
- Protocol types in reviewed reports
- RWA redemptionConfirmed in cited evidence · Checked 2026-09-05. Types observed in the report examples below, not an exhaustive provider portfolio. Source for protocol types in reviewed reports
- Current pricing
- Request a scoped quote; no current price verifiedInsufficient evidence · Checked 2026-09-05. Not established from the public sources checked in this pass. Request current evidence from the provider.
- Availability
- Confirm directly with providerInsufficient evidence · Checked 2026-09-05. Not established from the public sources checked in this pass. Request current evidence from the provider.
Public report examples
These observations apply to named scopes and code revisions. They do not establish the safety of a current deployment.
Tangible USDR Redemption v2
Final report: . Source checked .
- Protocol type
- RWA redemption
- Scope
- Fixed-rate redemption contracts on Polygon; Solidity.
- Code revision
- 4428548 → f59a0f5
- Follow-up evidence
- The report lists initial and final revisions and five resolved findings.
- Limit
- Only the redemption v2 scope is represented. This does not assess the economics, reserves or complete history of USDR.
Sources were checked on September 5, 2026. This is a bounded public-source review, not a technical endorsement. Report examples cover named versions only. Confirm the proposed scope, price and available team with the provider.
DSA research and technical review
Hacken analysis: report evidence and historical limits
Read the original evidence review for Hacken. It includes measurements, primary sources, limitations and a downloadable PDF.
No independent committee assessment or technical score has been issued. The proposed review procedure requires two qualified reviewers, conflict checks, recent relevant reports and supported findings across seven criteria.
What to include in your request
- Code repository, intended revision, chain, language and protocol design.
- High-risk operations, trust assumptions, privileged roles and exclusions.
- Target start, budget, release deadline and required fix-review allowance.
- A request for three recent comparable project reports and the reviewers assigned to your project.