Root docs
Repository viewer
Legacy docs parity surface
Back to repository viewer
Repository document
Judge Technical Audit Note
judge-technical-audit.md
Boundary
This route preserves legacy markdown access inside the Next.js surface. The raw repository file remains authoritative.
Open raw fileJudge 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
SendSolchecks recipient configurationSendTokenchecks 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.