Is Your EigenLayer AVS Audit Secured by Experts?

🔎 How do you audit oracles like eOracle?

Oracles are frequently targeted for manipulation and mispricing. We audit:

• Off-chain → on-chain data syncing logic
• Median or aggregation mechanisms
• Bridge dependency surfaces
• Flash loan exposure in pricing feeds

Dedaub secured eOracle, an AVS-integrated middleware, by uncovering and mitigating timing-based feed inconsistencies. Our review ensured high-integrity Oracle inputs for critical EigenLayer restaking logic.

⛓️ What types of risks do bridge audits identify?

Cross-chain bridges are high-value targets due to their complexity and attack surface. We review:

• Message relay logic and nonce tracking
• Replay vulnerability resistance
• Consensus bypasses and timestamp inconsistencies
• Economic misalignment across chains

We detected critical vulnerabilities in high-value decentralized bridges, highlighted by our proactive identification of a critical exploit yielding over $1 billion in potential losses, for which we were awarded a $2 million bounty.

📅 How long does an AVS audit take and what's the process?

AVS audits typically take 1–4 weeks, depending on code complexity and responsiveness.

Our process starts with a two-phase review:

Phase 1: Auditors map out the code's intended functionality—how it should behave under normal conditions.

Phase 2: They switch perspectives and act as attackers, trying to break the system by exploiting edge cases, economic loopholes, or unexpected flexibility.

Continuous peer challenge: Each audit is led by two senior researchers who push each other to uncover blind spots. If one claims a section is covered, the other challenges them to explain the hardest edge cases, forcing more profound clarity and coverage.

Multi-layer threat modeling: We don't just review isolated functions. Our auditors intentionally explore how different modules interact, simulating complex exploit paths across staking, governance, and validation layers.

Tool-assisted + human-led: Every project is uploaded into the Dedaub Security Suite, where over 70 automated vulnerability detectors, AI-based pattern matchers, and custom fuzzers run in parallel. We complement these with manual tests on anything suspicious, especially where computerized tools can't reason about business logic.

🔐 What does a staking audit include?

We analyze smart contract logic that governs delegation, validator selection, slashing, and staking economics. Key areas we check:

• Insecure delegation patterns
• Slashing condition bypasses
• Inconsistent validator quorum checks
• Economic model fragility (e.g., griefing vectors, capital inefficiencies)

Our audits have helped EigenLayer Middleware, Aethos, and Othentic launch safely by identifying critical staking vulnerabilities. Previous audits collectively secured assets exceeding $30 billion and identified and resolved numerous high-severity vulnerabilities, safeguarding critical staking infrastructure.

🔧 What makes AVS audits different from standard smart contract audits?

AVS audits require more in-depth economic modeling and a review of validator logic. Unlike standard dApps, AVS protocols rely on dynamic staking, slashing, and governance mechanisms that can collapse if assumptions break under adversarial pressure.

Dedaub's AVS audits combine traditional code analysis with simulation of validator misbehavior, restaking edge cases, and economic incentives under attack.

🧪 What tools and techniques do you use in AVS audits?

We use a blend of automated and manual techniques:

• Static analysis via the Dedaub Security Suite (70+ vulnerability detectors)
• Custom fuzzing for edge-case validator logic
• Manual simulation of delegation and governance changes
• Formal methods when necessary for economic consistency guarantees

Clients also gain access to our Security Suite portal, where they can explore the machine-generated issues our team has reviewed and prioritized.

🔄 What happens after the audit?

Once the audit begins, our team collaborates closely with your developers, reviewing the codebase, sharing early findings, and iterating through fixes as needed.

Here's what to expect:

Preliminary report: We categorize all findings by severity—Critical, High, Medium, Low, or Advisory—and walk your team through them.

Issue resolution support: Your team fixes the issues with our guidance.

Final verification: We conduct a thorough review to ensure that everything is properly resolved.

Comprehensive final report: Delivered after all fixes are validated—ready for publication or stakeholder review.

We align the process with your timeline and budget from the outset, and maintain synchronization through regular communication.