Elixir is building the industry’s decentralized, algorithmic market making protocol. Through the Elixir Protocol, anyone will be able to passively supply liquidity to orderbook pairs on spot and perp DEXes across the space, earning subsidized APYs from existing long term liquidity incentive programs offered by exchanges.
Elixir will serve as crucial infrastructure for decentralized (and eventually) centralized exchanges, enabling ecosystem participants to provide liquidity to orderbook pairs via a purpose-built, decentralized DPoS consensus protocol in development for over two years. Elixir utilizes the orderbook equivalent of x*y=k curves, similar to Uniswap v2, to build up order books and tighten the bid/ask spread, bringing a familiar delta-neutral risk/return profile for liquidity providers.
For more information about Elixir, please visit elixir.finance
Elixir provides rewards in USDC, denominated in USD. For more details about the payment process, please view the Rewards by Threat Level section further below.
Elixir adheres to category 3 - Approval Required. This Policy determines what information researchers are allowed to make public from their submitted bug reports. For more information about the category selected, please refer to our Responsible Publication page.
Primacy of Impact vs Primacy of Rules
Elixir adheres to the Primacy of Impact for the following categories and severity levels:
- Smart Contract: Critical
- Smart Contract: High
- Smart Contract: Medium
Primacy of Impact means that the impact is prioritized rather than a specific asset. This encourages security researchers to report on all bugs with an in-scope impact, even if the affected assets are not in scope. For more information, please see Best Practices: Primacy of Impact
When submitting a report on Immunefi’s dashboard, the security researcher should select the Primacy of Impact asset placeholder. If the team behind this project has multiple projects, those other projects are not covered under Primacy of Impact for this program. Instead, check if those other projects have a bug bounty program on Immunefi.
If the project has any testnet and/or mock files, those will not be covered under Primacy of Impact.
All other impacts are considered under the Primacy of Rules, which means that they are bound by the terms set within this program.
Proof of Concept (PoC) Requirements
A PoC, demonstrating the bug's impact, is required for this program and has to comply with the Immunefi PoC Guidelines and Rules.
Known Issue Assurance
Elixir commits to providing Known Issue Assurance to bug submissions through their program. This means that Elixir will either disclose known issues publicly or at the very least privately via a self-reported bug submission.
In scenarios where there might be a mediation, this allows for a more objective and streamlined process to prove that an issue is known. Otherwise, assuming the bug report is valid, it would result in the report being considered as in-scope, and due a reward.
Elixir Protocol has provided these completed audit reports for reference. Any unfixed vulnerability mentioned in these reports are not eligible for a reward. All Audit reports for Elixir can be accessed on:
The project may be receiving reports that are valid (the bug and attack vector are real) and cite assets and impacts that are in scope, but there may be obstacles or barriers to executing the attack in the real world. In other words, there is a question about how feasible the attack really is. Conversely, there may also be mitigation measures that projects can take to prevent the impact of the bug, which are not feasible or would require unconventional action and hence, should not be used as reasons for downgrading a bug's severity.
Therefore, Immunefi has developed a set of feasibility limitation standards which by default states what security researchers, as well as projects, can or cannot cite when reviewing a bug report.
Immunefi Standard Badge
By adhering to Immunefi’s best practice recommendations, Elixir has satisfied the requirements for the Immunefi Standard Badge.
Rewards by Threat Level
Rewards are distributed according to the impact of the vulnerability based on the Immunefi Vulnerability Severity Classification System V2.3.
For critical smart contract bugs, the reward amount is 10% of the funds directly affected up to a maximum of USD $250,000. The calculation of the amount of funds at risk is based on the time and date the bug report is submitted. However, a minimum reward of USD $75,000 is to be rewarded in order to incentivize security researchers against withholding a critical bug report.
Repeatable Attack Limitations
- If the smart contract where the vulnerability exists can be upgraded or paused, only the initial attacks within the first hour will be considered for a reward. This is because the project can mitigate the risk of further exploitation by upgrading or pausing the component where the vulnerability exists. The reward amount will depend on the severity of the impact and the funds at risk.
- For critical repeatable attacks on smart contracts that cannot be upgraded or paused, the project will consider the cumulative impact of the repeatable attacks for a reward. This is because the project cannot prevent the attacker from repeatedly exploiting the vulnerability until all funds are drained and/or other irreversible damage is done. Therefore, this warrants a reward equivalent to 10% of funds at risk, capped at the maximum critical reward.
Reward Calculation for High Level Reports
- High vulnerabilities concerning theft/permanent freezing of unclaimed yield/royalties are considered at the full amount of funds at risk, capped at the maximum high reward. This is to incentivize security researchers to uncover and responsibly disclose vulnerabilities that may have not have significant monetary value today, but could still be damaging to the project if it goes unaddressed.
- In the event of temporary freezing, the reward increases at a multiplier of two from the full frozen value for every additional 24h that the funds are temporarily frozen, up until a max cap of the high reward. This is because as the duration of the freezing lenghents, the potential for greater damage and subsequent reputational harm intensifies. Thus, by increasing the reward proportionally with the frozen duration, the project ensures stronger incentives for bug disclosure of this nature.
For critical web/apps bug reports will be rewarded with $50,000, only if the impact leads to:
- A loss of funds involving an attack that does not require any user action
- Unauthorized minting of tokens on-chain
- Private key or private key generation leakage leading to unauthorized access to user funds
All other impacts that would be classified as Critical would be rewarded a flat amount of $10,000. The rest of the severity levels are paid out according to the Impact in Scope table.
Reward Payment Terms
Payouts are handled by the Elixir Protocol team directly and are denominated in USD. However, payments are done in $USDC.
The calculation of the net amount rewarded is based on the average price between CoinMarketCap.com and CoinGecko.com at the time the bug report was submitted. No adjustments are made based on liquidity availability.
- USD $75,000 to USD $250,000
- USD $10,000 to USD $75,000
- USD $5,000
- USD $1,000
Websites and Applications
- USD $10,000 to USD $50,000
- USD $10,000
- USD $5,000
- USD $1,000
Assets in scope
- Smart Contract - Elixir ManagerType
- Smart Contract - WBTC Spot RouterType
- Smart Contract - WETH Spot RouterType
- Smart Contract - ARB Spot RouterType
- Smart Contract - USDT Spot RouterType
- Smart Contract - BTC Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - ETH Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - ARB Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - BNB Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - XRP Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - SOL Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - MATIC Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - SUI Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - OP Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - APT Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - LTC Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - BCH Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - COMP Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - MKR Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - mPEPE Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - DOGE Perp RouterType
- Smart Contract - LINK Perp RouterType
- Primacy Of ImpactTargetSmart ContractType
- Websites and Applications - app.elixir.financeType
- Primacy Of ImpactTargetWebsites and ApplicationsType
All code of Elixir Protocol can be found at https://github.com/ElixirProtocol/. Documentation for the assets provided in the table can be found at
Impacts in scope
Only the following impacts are accepted within this bug bounty program. All other impacts are not considered as in-scope, even if they affect something in the assets in scope table.
- Direct theft of any user funds, whether at-rest or in-motion, other than unclaimed yieldCriticalImpact
- Permanent freezing of fundsCriticalImpact
- Protocol insolvencyCriticalImpact
- Theft of unclaimed yieldHighImpact
- Theft of unclaimed royaltiesHighImpact
- Permanent freezing of unclaimed yieldMediumImpact
- Permanent freezing of unclaimed royaltiesMediumImpact
- Temporary freezing of fundsMediumImpact
- Smart contract unable to operate due to lack of token fundsMediumImpact
- Block stuffingMediumImpact
- Griefing (e.g. no profit motive for an attacker, but damage to the users or the protocol)MediumImpact
- Theft of gasMediumImpact
- Unbounded gas consumptionMediumImpact
- Contract fails to deliver promised returns, but doesn't lose valueLowImpact
Websites and Applications
- Execute arbitrary system commandsCriticalImpact
- Retrieve sensitive data/files from a running server, such as: /etc/shadow, database passwords, blockchain keys (not include non-sensitive environment variables, open source code, or usernames), Taking down the application/website, Taking down the NFT URICriticalImpact
- Taking state-modifying authenticated actions (with or without blockchain state interaction) on behalf of other users without any interaction by that user, such as: Changing registration information, Commenting, Voting, Making trades, Withdrawals, etc.CriticalImpact
- Subdomain takeover with already-connected wallet interactionCriticalImpact
- Direct theft of user fundsCriticalImpact
- Malicious interactions with an already-connected wallet, such as: Modifying transaction arguments or parameters, Substituting contract addresses, Submitting malicious transactionsCriticalImpact
- Injection of malicious HTML or XSS through metadataCriticalImpact
- Changing sensitive details of other users (including modifying browser local storage) without already-connected wallet interaction and with up to one click of user interaction, such as: Email, Password of the victim etc.HighImpact
- Improperly disclosing confidential user information, such as: Email address, Phone number, Physical address, etc.HighImpact
- Subdomain takeover without already-connected wallet interactionHighImpact
- Changing non-sensitive details of other users (including modifying browser local storage) without already-connected wallet interaction and with up to one click of user interaction, such as: Changing the name of user, Enabling/disabling notificationsMediumImpact
- Redirecting users to malicious websites (open redirect)MediumImpact
- Changing details of other users (including modifying browser local storage) without already-connected wallet interaction and with significant user interaction, such as: Iframing leading to modifying the backend/browser state (demonstrate impact with PoC)LowImpact
- Taking over broken or expired outgoing links, such as: Social media handles, etc.LowImpact
- Temporarily disabling user to access target site, such as: Locking up the victim from login, Cookie bombing, etc.LowImpact
Out of Scope & Rules
These impacts are out of scope for this bug bounty program.
- Impacts requiring attacks that the reporter has already exploited themselves, leading to damage
- Impacts caused by attacks requiring access to leaked keys/credentials
- Impacts caused by attacks requiring access to privileged addresses (governance, strategist) except in such cases where the contracts are intended to have no privileged access to functions that make the attack possible
- Impacts relying on attacks involving the depegging of an external stablecoin where the attacker does not directly cause the depegging due to a bug in code
- Mentions of secrets, access tokens, API keys, private keys, etc. in Github will be considered out of scope without proof that they are in-use in production
- Best practice recommendations
- Feature requests
- Impacts on test files and configuration files unless stated otherwise in the bug bounty program
Blockchain/DLT & Smart Contract Specific:
- Incorrect data supplied by third party oracles
- Not to exclude oracle manipulation/flash loan attacks
- Impacts requiring basic economic and governance attacks (e.g. 51% attack)
- Lack of liquidity impacts
- Impacts from Sybil attacks
- Impacts involving centralization risks
- This includes loss of funds related to owner/admin control
Websites and Apps
- Theoretical impacts without any proof or demonstration
- Impacts involving attacks requiring physical access to the victim device
- Impacts involving attacks requiring access to the local network of the victim
- Reflected plain text injection (e.g. url parameters, path, etc.)
- This does not exclude persistent plain text injection
- Any impacts involving self-XSS
- Captcha bypass using OCR without impact demonstration
- CSRF with no state modifying security impact (e.g. logout CSRF)
- Impacts related to missing HTTP Security Headers (such as X-FRAME-OPTIONS) or cookie security flags (such as “httponly”) without demonstration of impact
- Server-side non-confidential information disclosure, such as IPs, server names, and most stack traces
- Impacts causing only the enumeration or confirmation of the existence of users or tenants
- Impacts caused by vulnerabilities requiring un-prompted, in-app user actions that are not part of the normal app workflows
- Lack of SSL/TLS best practices
- Impacts that only require Denial of Service or DDoS
- UX and UI impacts that do not materially disrupt use of the platform
- Impacts primarily caused by browser/plugin defects
- Leakage of non sensitive API keys (e.g. Etherscan, Infura, Alchemy, etc.)
- Any vulnerability exploit requiring browser bugs for exploitation (e.g. CSP bypass)
- SPF/DMARC misconfigured records)
- Missing HTTP Headers without demonstrated impact
- Automated scanner reports without demonstrated impact
- UI/UX best practice recommendations
- Non-future-proof NFT rendering
- Any testing on mainnet or public testnet deployed code; all testing should be done on local-forks of either public testnet or mainnet
- Any testing with pricing oracles or third-party smart contracts
- Attempting phishing or other social engineering attacks against our employees and/or customers
- Any testing with third-party systems and applications (e.g. browser extensions) as well as websites (e.g. SSO providers, advertising networks)
- Any denial of service attacks that are executed against project assets
- Automated testing of services that generates significant amounts of traffic
- Public disclosure of an unpatched vulnerability in an embargoed bounty