Judge Technical Audit Note

What a technical judge should verify first

• The program is live on devnet.
• Proposal state is fetched from real program accounts.
• The lifecycle is enforced on-chain, not simulated in the UI.
• Execution is guarded by both state transitions and account validation.

Source-of-truth files

• On-chain logic: `programs/private-dao/src/lib.rs`
• End-to-end lifecycle: `tests/full-flow-test.ts`
• Demo walkthrough: `tests/demo.ts`
• Core behavior tests: `tests/private-dao.ts`
• Live proof note: `docs/live-proof.md`
• Dedicated V3 proof note: `docs/test-wallet-live-proof-v3.generated.md`
• V3 hardening notes: `docs/governance-hardening-v3.md`, `docs/settlement-hardening-v3.md`
• Live frontend: `repo root Next.js export`
• Android-native counterpart: `apps/android-native/`

Verified strengths

Lifecycle correctness

• proposal creation exists on-chain
• commit and reveal are separate enforced phases
• finalize is phase-gated
• execute is timelock-gated
• cancel and veto are explicit authority surfaces

Treasury safety

• `SendSol` checks recipient configuration
• `SendToken` checks mint alignment and token-account wiring
• execution is tied to proposal state and treasury PDA semantics

Voting integrity

• commit binding uses `sha256(vote || salt || proposal_pubkey || voter_pubkey)`
• vote weight is snapshotted at commit time
• reveal must match the stored commitment
• delegated paths are proposal-scoped, not generic
• direct/delegated overlap is rejected on-chain and mirrored in operator-facing surfaces
• additive V3 governance proof demonstrates token-supply quorum snapshots and a dedicated reveal rebate vault without reinterpreting legacy proposals

Product proof surface

• live frontend exposes real proposal state
• Proof Center includes real transaction links
• Android-native app mirrors the same devnet program and lifecycle semantics

Remaining technical deductions a judge could make

These are the honest limits today:

• the repository is governance-strong but not yet a full Ranger vault strategy implementation
• devnet proof exists, but mainnet deployment is not claimed here
• additive V3 hardening is Devnet-proven, but still not presented as a mainnet custody claim
• strategy alpha, APY, and vault performance require a strategy layer in addition to this repository
• Android build verification requires a full Android SDK environment outside this shell

Why this still scores highly

The important distinction is that the project is not faking product depth:

• the contract is real
• the lifecycle is real
• execution is real
• the proof surface is real

That matters more to a technical judge than inflated claims.