Skip to content

docs: add the Certora audit report - #106

Open
remedcu wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/certora-audit-report
Open

docs: add the Certora audit report#106
remedcu wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
docs/certora-audit-report

Conversation

@remedcu

@remedcu remedcu commented Sep 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Adds the final Certora audit report and an index for it.

Context and Motivation

Decisions and Tradeoffs

  • Laid out to match safe-global/safe-modules, which keeps an audit.md index beside the reports and names them audit-report-<auditor>-<audit scope>. More audits are expected, so the index uses ## Audit N sections that later auditors are appended to.
  • When a future version of the contracts is reviewed, that repository's convention is a versioned subdirectory — the natural next step rather than something needed now.
  • The scope is recorded explicitly: only PolicyEngine.sol, SafePolicyGuard.sol, AccessSelector.sol and SignatureExtension.sol were reviewed. Everything under contracts/policies/ was out of scope, which a reader would otherwise reasonably assume was covered.

Testing

  • Documentation only.

@remedcu remedcu self-assigned this Sep 9, 2026
## Context and Motivation

Certora reviewed the policy engine between 17 and 25 August 2026, starting from `bcb5032` and
finalising on `405ba1d`. That second commit is the tip after the five audit-response PRs, so the
final report reflects the fixes rather than only the state that was reviewed.

Five low severity findings were reported. Two were fixed and three acknowledged. PRs #100 to #104
carry the responses individually.

## Decisions and Tradeoffs

Laid out to match `safe-global/safe-modules`, which keeps an `audit.md` index beside the reports and
names them `audit-report-<auditor>`. More audits are expected, so the index uses `## Audit N`
sections that later auditors are appended to. When a future version of the contracts is reviewed,
that repository's convention is a versioned subdirectory. That is the natural next step, not
something needed yet.

The scope is recorded explicitly. Only `PolicyEngine.sol`, `SafePolicyGuard.sol`,
`AccessSelector.sol` and `SignatureExtension.sol` were reviewed. Everything under
`contracts/policies/` was out of scope, which a reader would otherwise reasonably assume was covered.

## Testing

Documentation only.
@remedcu
remedcu requested a balanced review from Copilot September 9, 2026 14:38
@remedcu
remedcu force-pushed the docs/certora-audit-report branch from 5c043fa to 25b4f80 Compare September 9, 2026 14:38
@remedcu
remedcu requested a review from akshay-ap September 9, 2026 14:39

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟢 Approval recommended

It is an additive documentation-only change whose paths, link, dates, and findings summary were all verified as accurate.

Pull request overview

This PR adds the final Certora audit report (PDF) to the repository along with a new audits/audit.md index file that summarizes the audit. It establishes a documentation convention (modeled after safe-global/safe-modules) using ## Audit N sections so future audits can be appended, and explicitly records the audit scope, dates, source commits, and findings summary. This is purely additive documentation with no code changes.

Changes:

  • Adds a new audits/audit.md index describing the Certora audit (auditor, dates, in-scope contracts, findings summary, and a link to the report).
  • Adds the binary audits/audit-report-certora-policy-engine-core.pdf (the final report).
File summaries
File Description
audits/audit.md New audit index summarizing the Certora audit, scope, and findings, with a relative link to the report PDF.
audits/audit-report-certora-policy-engine-core.pdf The final Certora audit report (binary, not diff-reviewable).

Verification performed:

  • The relative link audit-report-certora-policy-engine-core.pdf resolves correctly to the added file in the same directory (a valid 8-page PDF).
  • All four in-scope contract paths (contracts/core/PolicyEngine.sol, contracts/SafePolicyGuard.sol, contracts/libraries/AccessSelector.sol, contracts/libraries/SignatureExtension.sol) exist as written.
  • Dates (Aug 17–25, 2026) are in the past relative to the current date; heading structure, spelling, and grammar are clean and consistent.
  • The findings summary (five low-severity, two fixed, three acknowledged) is consistent with the PR description.

No issues were found, so I have no comments to store.

Review details
  • Files reviewed: 1/2 changed files
  • Comments generated: 0
  • Review effort level: Balanced

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants