Sigma Prime - Security Assessment Services for Aave
01Summary
Aave governance approves a security assessment services engagement with Sigma Prime for 12 months at a minimum fee of US$1,296,000, with 50% ($648,000) paid upfront in aUSDC and aUSDT, and the remaining 50% payable at the end of the engagement period. Sigma Prime has been providing security reviews to Aave for 2.5 years and will continue assessing protocol updates including critical upgrades.
- Type
- treasury allocation
- Funding
- $1296000
Key changes
- Authorization of US$1,296,000 minimum engagement fee payment to Sigma Prime for 12-month security assessment services(high)
- Upfront payment of US$648,000 (50% of minimum fee) in aUSDC and aUSDT split evenly(high)
- Deferred payment of remaining US$648,000 at end of 12-month engagement period via payment streams(high)
- Commitment to security assessments for protocol updates including v2 to v3 migration(high)
Notable concerns
- Additional proposal may be required in 12 months if maximum engagement fee applies beyond the minimum engagement fee authorized by this proposal
Generated by Kvorum
02Description
Summary
This proposal acts as a mandate from the Aave community to engage Sigma Prime for continous security assessment services as outlined in this post and already pre-approved via Snapshot here.
Abstract
The aim of this proposal is to ensure Aave receives high-quality security assessment services to address all upcoming updates to its protocols, including critical upgrades such as the v2 → v3 migration.
Sigma Prime has been providing security assessment services to Aave for the past 2.5 years, reviewing critical components such as Aave v2 and v3, along with various other changes made to the lending platform.
Motivation
Aave’s success relies partly on its ability to deliver high quality products with a strong security posture. To date, and despite the large TVL potentially attracting a lot of malicious actors, Aave users haven’t suffered any losses due to smart contract bugs or vulnerabilities. Lately, it has been increasingly difficult to contract reputable smart contract security auditors, as most of the prominent firms in this space are booked out for months.
Specification
This proposal authorises payment of the minimum engagement fee outlined in the proposal (US$ 1,296,000) through the following:
- Upfront payment for 50% of the minimum engagement fee (US$ 648,000) paid in aUSDC and aUSDT (even split, $324,000 each)
- Remaining 50% (US$ 648,000) paid at the end of the engagement period (12 months) via two (2) payment streams in aUSDC and aUSDT (even split, $324,000 each), with each stream starting 12 months from now, and lasting a duration of 1 second.
If the maximum fee was to apply to this engagement, a subsequent proposal will be pushed forward for the remaining amount in 12 months (i.e at the end of the engagement period).
Rationale
Sigma Prime is an information security consultancy who specialise in Blockchain technology and administered from Sydney, Australia.
The primary focus of Sigma Prime is to help secure distributed systems through in-depth security assessments of decentralised projects, while concurrently researching and developing core Blockchain infrastructure. Over the past 6 years, we have been working with some of the most prominent organisations in the space: the Ethereum Foundation, Chainlink, SushiSwap, 1inch, the Filecoin Foundation, NEAR, Arbitrum, Lido, Rocket Pool, and plenty of others.
Sigma Prime is also the founder and maintainer of the Lighthouse project, an open-source implementation of the Ethereum Proof-of-Stake Consensus specification, written in Rust. Lighthouse is one of the leading Ethereum consensus client implementations and has a particular focus on performance and security.
Throughout the works performed for Aave, the feedback received from the leadership team has been highly positive. Sigma Prime has gained a high degree of familiarity with the protocol, which will be leveraged as required for the delivery of this engagement.
Test Cases
- Please refer to the test section of the sigp/sigp-aip-payload repository.
Implementation
Copyright
Copyright and related rights waived via CC0.
03Mismatch analysis
The decoded calldata contains a single top-level action: a call to execute() on the contract address 0xe8ea74754dce51168102e820424f7e7f74c5be3e, which matches exactly the address the proposal cites in its 'Implementation' section as the PayloadAaveSigP contract. Because Aave governance payloads typically execute a single delegatecall to a purpose-built payload contract that internally performs the granular actions (token transfers, stream creation, etc.), the single decoded action here is consistent with the pattern described. However, the decoded data does not expose the internal logic of execute() (i.e., the specific USDC/USDT amounts, stream durations, or start times), so it is not possible to directly verify the numeric claims (e.g., $648,000 upfront split, two 1-second streams starting in 12 months) against on-chain calldata beyond confirming the target contract matches. No contradictions were found between the description and the one visible action, but the lack of decoded internal calls limits verification depth, warranting lower confidence rather than a flagged discrepancy. No omissions, target mismatches, or value mismatches are evident from the available decoded data, and there is no indication that the calldata does anything not described (e.g., no extra transfers to unrelated addresses, no additional targets). Given the single action strictly aligns with the named implementation contract and no contrary or extra actions are apparent, the overall assessment is 'consistent', with confidence set to 'low' due to the impossibility of validating the internal payment logic from the decoded top-level call alone.
Generated by Kvorum
04Actions
- Target
- 0xe8ea…be3e
- Value
- 0 wei
- Function
- fallback()
- Arguments
{}- Calldata
05Tally
Summed from votes
06Voters
| Voter | Choice | % of total | Rationale | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AF0xafda…3a6e | For | 93.5K | 21.56% | — | 4y ago |
| C40xc4a9…2935 | For | 92.5K | 21.34% | — | 4y ago |
| D20xd236…4fa6 | For | 73.9K | 17.05% | — | 4y ago |
| DD0xdd45…4cc5 | For | 65.5K | 15.11% | — | 4y ago |
| FE0xfe23…e636 | For | 48.7K | 11.24% | — | 4y ago |
| 360x36c4…2a8a | For | 41.6K | 9.60% | — | 4y ago |
| 070x0703…961b | For | 10K | 2.31% | — | 4y ago |
| 320x329c…3ed4 | For | 5K | 1.16% | — | 4y ago |
| 750x75e3…f20c | For | 1.3K | 0.30% | — | 4y ago |
| 620x6237…2935 | For | 1.2K | 0.29% | — | 4y ago |
| B80xb86c…7a75 | For | 51 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| BA0xbac2…1074 | For | 48.3 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| 680x688d…73be | For | 48.1 | 0.01% | — | 4y ago |
| B10xb1f5…d5ba | For | 15.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 000x0010…12cb | For | 11.6 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| A00xa0ef…2d56 | For | 8 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 890x89ab…fbab | For | 7.7 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| B60xb656…bb59 | For | 6.9 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| E90xe982…cdf8 | For | 4.4 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 250x250d…7881 | For | 4.1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| C60xc6b2…b3e1 | For | 3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 8E0x8ea2…c8d8 | For | 2.5 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| C50xc576…a12a | For | 2.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 940x945f…e358 | For | 1.4 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 190x196a…411f | For | 1.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 110x1186…9a1f | For | 1.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 520x5294…9b05 | For | 1.1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 1A0x1a81…27ca | For | 1.1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| A00xa055…daa5 | For | 1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| A50xa5ab…71f3 | For | 1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 450x4524…0036 | For | 1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| B30xb3b7…62b6 | For | 1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| B20xb251…31b3 | For | 0.9 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| BF0xbf4c…5a7c | For | 0.8 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 3C0x3ccd…dd5b | For | 0.5 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 810x81dd…b9ad | For | 0.5 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| DA0xdabc…3040 | For | 0.5 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 870x8755…ac18 | For | 0.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 430x43de…552a | For | 0.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 8F0x8fbb…774c | For | 0.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| A00xa077…2c84 | For | 0.3 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| BC0xbccb…9fda | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 2B0x2ba3…4a2d | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 480x48b1…7f6d | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 010x016e…c4b7 | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 340x34b3…8331 | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 070x0745…042e | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 8A0x8a0e…74bc | For | 0.2 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 7A0x7adb…d24f | For | 0.1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
| 600x60dd…70d3 | For | 0.1 | 0.00% | — | 4y ago |
07Forum
- Sigma Prime: Security Assessment Services for Aave ↗discourse · high confidence
Arguments for
- Sigma Prime has 2.5+ years of successful history with Aave, including deep familiarity with v2 and v3 codebases, reducing onboarding risk.— sigp, bgdlabs, stani, AaveLabs, Alex_BertoG
- Security is fundamental to Aave's success and the proposed engagement complements existing verification work by Certora.— MarcZeller, AaveLabs, Alex_BertoG, superproduct
- The budget of $1.296–1.512 million for 240 person-days of dedicated security services over 12 months is reasonable for the quality and scope provided.— bgdlabs, stani, MarcZeller
- The flexible 240+40 person-day structure with optional testing windows accommodates the unpredictable Aave development roadmap and allows coverage of emerging innovations.— bgdlabs, stani
- Engaging Sigma Prime as a DAO contributor advances decentralization of the ecosystem and sets a positive precedent for other quality service providers to contribute.— AaveLabs, Alex_BertoG
- Sigma Prime's broad scope of services—including web/API, mobile, infrastructure, and red-teaming—provides comprehensive security coverage beyond smart contracts.— sigp
- The team allocating same resources from previous Aave engagements ensures continuity and leverages institutional knowledge for critical upgrades like v2→v3 migration.— bgdlabs
Arguments against
- Spending $1.5 million annually on security audits provides no direct protection against bugs already deployed onchain and cannot prevent exploits after launch.— Marco_CIAN
Unresolved concerns
- Stani requested visibility into the specific key contributors and team members who would be allocated to the Aave engagement and their individual responsibility for the project.— stani
Notable participants
- sigpProposer; founder and representative of Sigma Prime presenting the master services agreement and engagement terms.
- bgdlabsCore ecosystem contributor and facilitator; endorsed the proposal and confirmed BGD's past positive experience with Sigma Prime's work.
- staniAave founder; provided explicit support, highlighted quality of previous audits, and requested clarity on key personnel allocation.
- AaveLabsAave protocol team; affirmed Sigma Prime's expertise, security priority, and complementary nature of the engagement with Certora.
- Alex_BertoGCommunity supporter; emphasized Aave's safety priority and Sigma Prime's privileged position as an established partner.
- MarcZellerStrong advocate; stressed that security spending is well-spent and praised Aave DAO's maturity in funding its own security needs.
- superproductCommunity supporter; affirmed long-term value of Sigma Prime's relationship and the proposal's alignment with protocol priorities.
- Marco_CIANLone critic; raised the primary objection that security audits cannot prevent exploits of already-deployed code.
Generated by Kvorum
08Similar proposals
- aaveexecutedAave <> Certora Continuous Security Services75%
- aaveexecutedSecurity Services for Aave Current Infrastructure <> Certora74%
- aaveexecutedSecurity Services for Aave v4 <> Certora74%
- aaveexecutedCertora Continuous Formal Verification73%
- aaveexecutedContinuous Formal Verification72%
- aaveexecutedContinuous Security Proposal Aave <> Certora72%