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.
-
It still makes sense for auditors to partner with insurance companies serving end-consumers, not the projects. All the code is open source anyway. Chances are there's more money in this market.
Insurance companies are free to read or request our reporting to base their decisions. The extra cash I could make in this unethical market would compromise my ability to serve my clients. Firms can buy their own insurance and should leave security vendors out as middlemen.
-
-
Users are just as free to purchase their own policies for the funds they’ve risked by using smart contracts, and read or request our reporting all the same. It’s key that firms like mine remain independent and unencumbered by external profit motives.
-
I see value in being purely independent but I see more value in being strongly financially aligned. We all want the contracts to be as secure as possible.
End of conversation
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.