Security

Wallet-authorized trading with signed execution limits. Understand the differences between offchain orders, deposits and bridge routes, and the scope of security reviews.

Last updated:

The short version: standard signed orders enforce your sell amount, receiver and minimum buy amount in the settlement contract. This does not remove bridge, token-issuer, wallet-compromise or infrastructure risk. Native-token and bridge deposits have different expiry and recovery rules. Review the scope of each linked security report.

Audit methodology and tools

Ophis used the following open-source security skills, guidance, analysis tools, and formal-verification technology across applicable review scopes.

Pashov skills Solidity audit-readiness, threat-model, invariant, and differential-review workflows. ETHSKILLS Ethereum guidance for chain semantics, RPC behavior, contract calls, and signing. Trail of Bits Slither static analysis, Echidna property fuzzing, and security-review checklists. Verity Lang Lean 4 machine-checked proofs for Ophis access-control models.

These credits describe Ophis's use of tooling and methodology. They do not represent an independent audit, engagement, certification, or endorsement by Pashov Audit Group, ETHSKILLS contributors, Trail of Bits, or LFG Labs / Verity. Ophis has not yet engaged an external audit firm for the fork-specific pieces.

Is Ophis custodial?

Signing keys stay with the trader or agent. Standard signed ERC-20 orders keep funds in the wallet until settlement. Native-token orders, bridge routes and optional external OTC escrow can require deposits and gas, with separate recovery rules. Review each wallet authorization.

Is Ophis audited?

Upstream CoW audits cover relevant shared code, not every Ophis modification or deployment. Ophis-specific allowlist and settlement-buffer changes have internal/tool-assisted reviews. The linked reports define their scope. Using audit skills and tools is not an organizational audit or endorsement by their authors; no external-firm audit is claimed for the fork-specific pieces.

Is MEV protection guaranteed?

Batch-auction orders use CoW Protocol settlement primitives, with Ophis deployments on operated chains. Offchain orders and uniform clearing prices per token pair mitigate common front-running and sandwich attacks. An order can never be settled below its signed limit price. Batch-auction settlement mitigates MEV by design; it is not an absolute guarantee against all adversarial conditions.

How should an autonomous agent trade safely?

Build a bounded order with a hard limit price, pin the receiver to the owner, and resolve supported domains via @ophis/sdk or MCP list_chains before signing. On Optimism, Unichain, Robinhood Chain, and Arc settlement is non-canonical. SDK v0.4.3 and the hosted MCP server include Arc (5042). Set an expiry and limit the funds and permissions available to a signing key.

How do I report a vulnerability?

Follow the disclosure policy in SECURITY.md in the public repository. Report privately first; do not open a public issue for an exploitable finding.

Sources and links