Berachain
Berachain is a high-performance EVM-Identical Layer 1 (L1) blockchain utilizing Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) as a consensus mechanism and built on top of a modular EVM-focused consensus client framework named BeaconKit.
PoC required
KYC required
Rewards
Rewards by Threat Level
Reward amount is 10% of the funds directly affected, capped at the maximum critical reward of:
$250,000Minimum reward to discourage security researchers from withholding a bug report:
$50,000Mainnet assets:
Reward amount is 10% of the funds directly affected up to a maximum of:
$250,000Minimum reward to discourage security researchers from withholding a bug report:
$50,000Rewards are distributed according to the impact of the vulnerability based on the Immunefi Vulnerability Severity Classification System V2.3.
Reward Calculation for Critical Level Reports
For critical Blockchain/DLT bugs, the reward amount is 10% of the funds directly affected, capped at the maximum critical reward of $250,000. However, a minimum reward of USD $50,000 is to be rewarded to incentivize security researchers against withholding a bug report.
For critical smart contract bugs, the reward amount is 10% of the funds directly affected up to a maximum of USD $250,000. Calculating the amount of funds at risk is based on the time and date the bug report is submitted. However, a minimum reward of USD $50,000 is to be rewarded 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 attack 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. 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 rewarded within $10,000 to $50,000 depending on the funds at risk, capped at the maximum high reward.
-
In the event of temporary freezing, the reward doubles 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 lengthens, the potential for more significant damage and subsequent reputational harm intensifies. Thus, by increasing the reward proportionally with the frozen duration, the project ensures more substantial incentives for bug disclosure of this nature.
Reward Payment Terms
Payouts are handled by the Berachain team directly and are denominated in USD. However, payments are made in BERA on Berachain.
The net amount rewarded is calculated 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.
Program Overview
Berachain is a high-performance EVM-Identical Layer 1 (L1) blockchain utilizing Proof-of-Liquidity (PoL) as a consensus mechanism and built on top of a modular EVM-focused consensus client framework named BeaconKit.
BeaconKit is a modular framework for building EVM-based consensus clients. The framework offers the most user-friendly way to build and operate an EVM blockchain while ensuring a functionally identical execution environment to the Ethereum Mainnet.
For more information about Berachain, please visit our docs or our code.
Berachain provides rewards in BERA on Berachain, denominated in USD. Please see the Rewards by Threat Level section for more details about the payment process.
KYC Requirement
Berachain will be requesting KYC information to pay for successful bug submissions. The following information will be required:
- Full name
- Date of birth
- Proof of address (either a redacted bank statement with the address or a recent utility bill)
- Copy of Passport or other Government ID
Eligibility Criteria
Security researchers who wish to participate must adhere to the rules of engagement outlined in this program and cannot be:
- On OFAC SDN list
- Official contributor, both past or present
- Employees and/or individuals closely associated with the project
- Security auditors who directly or indirectly participated in the audit review
Responsible Publication
Berachain adheres to category 3 - Approval Required. This Policy determines what information researchers can make public from their submitted bug reports. For more details on the category selected, please refer to our Responsible Publication page.
Berachain adheres to the Primacy of Rules, meaning the whole bug bounty program is run strictly under the terms and conditions stated on this page.
Proof of Concept (PoC) Requirements
A PoC demonstrating the bug's impact is required for this program and must comply with the Immunefi PoC Guidelines and Rules.
Public Disclosure of Known Issues
Bug reports covering previously discovered bugs (listed below) are not eligible for a reward within this program. This includes known issues that the project is aware of but has consciously decided not to “fix”, necessary code changes, or any implemented operational mitigating procedures that can lessen potential risk.
Previous Audits
Current known issues related to the Berachain Airdrops Contract are presented in the following audit reports:
- https://github.com/berachain/security-audits/blob/main/20250131-Airdrop-Zenith.pdf
- https://github.com/berachain/security-audits/blob/main/20250205-Airdrop-Cantina.pdf
- https://github.com/berachain/security-audits/blob/main/20241223-Airdrop-Zellic.pdf
Feasibility Limitations
The project may receive valid reports (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 is. Conversely, there may also be mitigation measures that projects can take to prevent the bug's impact, which are not viable or would require unconventional action.
Therefore, Immunefi has developed a set of feasibility limitation standards that, by default, state what security researchers and projects can or cannot cite when reviewing a bug report.
Immunefi Standard Badge
By adhering to Immunefi’s best practice recommendations, Berachain has satisfied the requirements for the Immunefi Standard Badge.
If you are interested in exploring Berachain (Web/Apps), check out our Websites and Applications bug bounty program here: https://immunefi.com/bug-bounty/berachain-webapps/information/
KYC required
The submission of KYC information is a requirement for payout processing.
Proof of Concept
Proof of concept is always required for all severities.
Responsible Publication
Category 3: Approval Required
Prohibited Activities
- 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
- Any other actions prohibited by the Immunefi Rules
Feasibility Limitations
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.