Runnable PoC Required
Rewards
Rewards by Threat Level
Mainnet assets:
Reward amount is 20% of the funds directly affected up to a maximum of:
$500,000Minimum reward to discourage security researchers from withholding a bug report:
$50,000Primacy of Impact vs Primacy of Rules
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 programs, those other programs 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 and conditions set within this program.
Reward Calculation for Critical Level Reports
For critical smart contract bugs, the reward amount is 20% of the funds directly affected up to a maximum of $500,000. 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 $50,000 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 attack will be considered for a reward.
The amount of funds at risk will be calculated with the impact of the first attack being at 100% and then a reduction of 50% from the amount of the first attack for every 24 hours the attack needs for subsequent attacks from the first attack, rounded down.
Reward Calculation for High Level Reports
High impacts concerning theft/permanent freezing of unclaimed yield/royalties are rewarded within a range of $10,000 to $50,000 with the reward calculated based on 100% of the funds at risk, though capped at the maximum high reward.
In the event of temporary freezing, the reward doubles from the full frozen value for every additional 24 hours that the funds are temporarily frozen, up until a max cap of the high reward.
Rewards for High and Medium smart contract vulnerabilities are 20% of the funds directly affected. Each amount is capped at its tier’s maximum and floored at its tier’s minimum.
Permanent freezing of funds critical is capped at 200 000$.
Malicious price provider implementations are out of scope. We still encourage research in this area: the team may, at its discretion, award individual valid findings hence why we added it to the scope as low.
Program Overview
We're launching this bug bounty alongside our mainnet deployment. We want whitehats to look for vulnerabilities that could cause loss or freezing of user or LP funds, swaps at the wrong price, abuse of the oracle or extension logic, or a way around access controls and timelocks. Our main concerns are the pool, factory, oracles, extension and router contracts.
Audits
Completed audit reports for this project can be found at the links below.
Any unpatched or unresolved vulnerabilities disclosed in these reports are not eligible for rewards.
Known Issues
Reports covering previously identified bugs listed below are not eligible for rewards under this program.
This includes:
- Known issues that the project is aware of, even if no fix or code changes have been implemented.
- Issues the project has consciously decided not to remediate.
- Cases where operational mitigations or procedures have been implemented to reduce potential risk.
KYC not required
No KYC information is required 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.