name: audit-reports
description: Generate formatted security audit findings for Web3 platforms (Sherlock, Code4rena, Cantina). Use when user needs to report vulnerabilities, format findings, or create audit reports for smart contract security contests.
version: 1
Audit Reports
Generate properly formatted security vulnerability reports for major Web3 audit contest platforms. Each platform has specific formatting requirements and judging criteria.
Supported Platforms
| Platform |
Format |
Severity Levels |
| Sherlock |
GitHub Issues |
HIGH, MEDIUM |
| Code4rena |
Submission Form |
High (3), Medium (2), QA (1) |
| Cantina |
LightChaser |
High, Medium, Low, Info |
Quick Start
When user requests to generate a finding report:
- Ask which platform (default: Code4rena format)
- Collect vulnerability details: title, severity, description, affected code, PoC, remediation
- Generate formatted report using the appropriate platform template
- Output the complete markdown ready for submission
Platform Resources
Sherlock
guides/sherlock/ - Official judging guidelines and severity criteria
examples/sherlock.md - Complete finding example
platforms/sherlock/template.md - Report template with invalid issues checklist
Code4rena
guides/code4rena/ - Risk ratings, PoC rules, QA report format
examples/code4rena.md - Complete finding example
platforms/code4rena/template.md - Submission format
Cantina
guides/cantina/ - Severity matrix, duplication rules, PoC requirements
examples/cantina.md - Complete finding example
platforms/cantina/template.md - Detailed submission template
Severity Quick Reference
Sherlock
| Severity |
Criteria |
| HIGH |
>1% AND >$10 loss, direct without extensive conditions |
| MEDIUM |
>0.01% AND >$10 loss, with constraints OR breaks core functionality |
| DOS |
>1 week locked = Medium; + time-sensitive = High |
Code4rena
| Risk Rating |
Criteria |
| 3 - High |
Assets stolen/lost/compromised (directly or via valid attack path) |
| 2 - Medium |
Assets not at direct risk, but protocol function/availability impacted |
| 1 - QA |
No assets at risk; includes Low + Governance/Centralization |
Cantina
| Severity |
Impact |
Likelihood |
| High |
Loss of funds / Breaks core functionality |
High |
| Medium |
DOS / Minor fund loss / Breaks non-core |
Medium |
| Low |
No assets at risk |
Any |
Common Invalid Issues (All Platforms)
- Gas optimizations
- Incorrect event values (no broader impact)
- Zero address checks
- User input validation only
- Admin mistakes (common sense)
- Approve/safeApprove front-running (Code4rena: explicitly invalid)
- Weird/non-standard tokens (unless explicitly in scope)
- View function errors (unused within protocol)
Best Practices
- Clear Title - Concise, describes vulnerability type
- Impact First - Judges need to quickly understand risk
- Root Cause - Explain WHY, not just WHAT
- Code References - Include
file:line format (e.g., src/Vault.sol:142)
- Working PoC - Executable test demonstrating the issue
- Clear Remediation - Specific code-level fix suggestions
Workflow Checklist
Resources
examples/ - Complete finding examples for each platform
guides/ - Official judging criteria and severity guides
platforms/ - Report templates and checklists