Smart contracts auditing companies like @trailofbits @ConsenSys Diligence or @OpenZeppelin should provide insurance services for smart contracts they are confident in.
Companies and users could pay x% per year to cover potential fund losses held or managed by some contracts.
-
Firms should hire
@trailofbits because I'll pledge to never gamble against my own clients or abuse insider information for personal profit. Users should know that our reports are never tainted by a personal profit motive. Avoid hiring anyone who won't do the same.
It's so extraordinarily unethical to be granted direct, unfettered access to a firm's engineering team, then turn around and gamble with that knowledge in a 3rd party betting pool. Think of the second order effects knowing that your security firm will start placing bets on you.
-
-
I may be mistaking, but my assumption was that both security firms and insurance firms have a strong incentive for contracts to be secure. If a contract is insecure, the formers lose their reputation while the laters lose funds (to reimburse losses). Where is the misalignment?
-
I have my own business insurance policy to cover the legal and other risks, a $5m policy! I bear no responsibility for my client’s code. I have no control! I’m a consultant, not an engineer on their team. I can’t make decisions. I can only provide recommendations that help.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.