software-crypto-web3

name	software-crypto-web3
description	Load when Mandate402 work touches EVM contracts, chain integration, signing, custody, onchain/offchain boundaries, audits, or blockchain operations.

Software Crypto/Web3 Engineering

Use this skill to design, implement, and review secure blockchain systems: smart contracts, on-chain/off-chain integration, custody and signing, testing, audits, and production operations.

Defaults to: security-first development, explicit threat models, comprehensive testing (unit + integration + fork + fuzz/invariants), formal methods when high-value, upgrade safety (timelocks, governance, rollback plans), and defense-in-depth for key custody and signing.

---

Quick Reference

Task	Tool/Framework	Command	When to Use
Solidity Development	Hardhat/Foundry	npx hardhat init or forge init	Ethereum/EVM smart contracts
Solana Programs	Anchor	anchor init	Solana blockchain development
Cosmos Contracts	CosmWasm	cargo generate --git cosmwasm-template	Cosmos ecosystem contracts
TON Contracts	Tact/FunC + Blueprint	npm create ton@latest	TON blockchain development
Testing (Solidity)	Foundry/Hardhat	forge test or npx hardhat test	Unit, fork, invariant tests
Security Audit	Slither/Aderyn/Echidna	slither . or aderyn .	Static analysis, fuzzing
AI-Assisted Review	AI scanners (optional)	N/A	Pre-audit preparation (verify findings manually)
Fuzzing	Echidna/Medusa	echidna . or medusa fuzz	Property-based fuzzing
Gas Optimization	Foundry Gas Snapshots	forge snapshot	Benchmark and optimize gas
Deployment	Hardhat Deploy/Forge Script	npx hardhat deploy	Mainnet/testnet deployment
Verification	Etherscan API	npx hardhat verify	Source code verification
Upgradeable Contracts	OpenZeppelin Upgrades	@openzeppelin/hardhat-upgrades	Proxy-based upgrades
Smart Wallets	ERC-4337, EIP-7702	Account abstraction SDKs	Smart accounts and sponsored gas (verify network support)

Scope

Use this skill when you need:

• Smart contract development (Solidity, Rust, CosmWasm)
• DeFi protocol implementation (AMM, lending, staking, yield farming)
• NFT and token standards (ERC20, ERC721, ERC1155, SPL tokens)
• DAO governance systems
• Cross-chain bridges and interoperability
• Gas optimization and storage patterns
• Smart contract security audits
• Testing strategies (Foundry, Hardhat, Anchor)
• Oracle integration (Chainlink, Pyth)
• Upgradeable contract patterns (proxies, diamonds)
• Web3 frontend integration (ethers.js, web3.js, @solana/web3.js)
• Blockchain indexing (The Graph, subgraphs)
• MEV protection and flashbots
• Layer 2 scaling solutions (Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, zkSync)
• Account abstraction (ERC-4337, EIP-7702, smart wallets)
• Backend crypto integration (.NET/C#, multi-provider architecture, CQRS)
• Webhook handling and signature validation (Fireblocks, custodial providers)
• Event-driven architecture with Kafka for crypto payments
• Transaction lifecycle management and monitoring
• Wallet management (custodial vs non-custodial)

Decision Tree: Blockchain Platform Selection

Project needs: [Use Case]
  - EVM-compatible smart contracts?
    - Complex testing needs -> Foundry (fuzzing, invariants, gas snapshots)
    - TypeScript ecosystem -> Hardhat (plugins, TS, Ethers.js/Viem)
    - Enterprise features -> NestJS + Hardhat

  - High throughput / low fees?
    - Rust-based -> Solana (Anchor)
    - EVM L2 -> Arbitrum/Optimism/Base (Ethereum security, lower gas)
    - Telegram distribution -> TON (Tact/FunC)

  - Interoperability across chains?
    - Cosmos ecosystem -> CosmWasm (IBC)
    - Multi-chain apps -> LayerZero or Wormhole (verify trust assumptions)
    - Bridge development -> custom (high risk; threat model required)

  - Token standard implementation?
    - Fungible tokens -> ERC20 (OpenZeppelin), SPL Token (Solana)
    - NFTs -> ERC721/ERC1155 (OpenZeppelin), Metaplex (Solana)
    - Semi-fungible -> ERC1155 (gaming, fractionalized NFTs)

  - DeFi protocol development?
    - AMM/DEX -> Uniswap V3 fork or custom (concentrated liquidity)
    - Lending -> Compound/Aave fork (collateralized borrowing)
    - Staking/yield -> custom reward distribution contracts

  - Upgradeable contracts required?
    - Transparent proxy -> OpenZeppelin (admin/user separation)
    - UUPS -> upgrade logic in implementation
    - Diamond -> modular functionality (EIP-2535)

  - Backend integration?
    - .NET/C# -> multi-provider architecture (see backend integration references)
    - Node.js -> Ethers.js/Viem + durable queues
    - Python -> Web3.py + FastAPI

Chain-Specific Considerations:

• Ethereum/EVM: Security-first, higher gas costs, largest ecosystem
• Solana: Performance-first, Rust required, lower fees
• Cosmos: Interoperability-first, IBC native, growing ecosystem
• TON: Telegram-first, async contracts, unique architecture

See references/ for chain-specific best practices.

---

Security-First Patterns (Jan 2026)

Security baseline: Assume an adversarial environment. Treat contracts and signing infrastructure as public, attackable APIs.

Custody, Keys, and Signing (Core)

Key management is a dominant risk driver in production crypto systems. Use a real key management standard as baseline (for example, NIST SP 800-57).

Model	Who holds keys	Typical use	Primary risks	Default controls
Non-custodial	End user wallet	Consumer apps, self-custody	Phishing, approvals, UX errors	Hardware wallet support, clear signing UX, allowlists
Custodial	Your service (HSM/MPC)	Exchanges, payments, B2B	Key theft, insider threat, ops mistakes	HSM/MPC, separation of duties, limits/approvals, audit logs
Hybrid	Split responsibility	Enterprises	Complex failure modes	Explicit recovery/override paths, runbooks

BEST:

• Separate hot/warm/cold signing paths with limits and approvals [Inference]
• Require dual control for high-value transfers (policy engine + human approval) [Inference]
• Keep an immutable audit trail for signing requests (who/what/when/why) [Inference]

AVOID:

• Storing private keys in databases or application config
• Reusing signing keys across environments (dev/staging/prod)
• Hot-wallet automation without rate limits and circuit breakers [Inference]

Checks-Effects-Interactions (CEI) Pattern

Mandatory for all state-changing functions.

// Correct: CEI pattern
function withdraw(uint256 amount) external {
    // 1. CHECKS: Validate conditions
    require(balances[msg.sender] >= amount, "Insufficient balance");

    // 2. EFFECTS: Update state BEFORE external calls
    balances[msg.sender] -= amount;

    // 3. INTERACTIONS: External calls LAST
    (bool success, ) = msg.sender.call{value: amount}("");
    require(success, "Transfer failed");
}

// Wrong: External call before state update (reentrancy risk)
function withdrawUnsafe(uint256 amount) external {
    require(balances[msg.sender] >= amount);
    (bool success, ) = msg.sender.call{value: amount}("");
    require(success);
    balances[msg.sender] -= amount; // Too late!
}

Security Tools (Jan 2026)

Category	Tool	Purpose	When to Use
Static Analysis	Slither	Vulnerability detection, 92+ detectors	Every contract
Static Analysis	Aderyn	Rust-based, faster for large codebases	Large projects
Fuzzing	Echidna	Property-based fuzzing	Complex state
Fuzzing	Medusa	Parallelized Go fuzzer	CI/CD pipelines
Formal Verification	SMTChecker	Built-in Solidity checker	Every contract
Formal Verification	Certora	Property-based proofs (CVL)	DeFi, high-value
Formal Verification	Halmos	Symbolic testing	Complex invariants
AI-Assisted	Sherlock AI	ML vulnerability detection	Pre-audit prep
AI-Assisted	Olympix	DevSecOps integration	CI/CD security
AI-Assisted	AuditBase	423+ detectors, LLM-powered	Business logic
Mutation Testing	SuMo	Test suite quality assessment	Test validation

// Certora CVL rule example
rule balanceNeverNegative(address user) {
    env e;
    require balances[user] >= 0;
    deposit(e);
    assert balances[user] >= 0;
}

AI-assisted review: Use AI tooling for pre-audit preparation and coverage, not for final security decisions. Treat outputs as untrusted and reproduce findings with deterministic tools, tests, and manual review.

MEV Protection

Strategy	Implementation
Private mempool	Flashbots Protect, MEV Blocker
Commit-reveal	Hash commitment, reveal after deadline
Batch auctions	CoW Protocol, Gnosis Protocol
Encrypted mempools	Shutter Network

// Commit-reveal pattern
mapping(address => bytes32) public commitments;

function commit(bytes32 hash) external {
    commitments[msg.sender] = hash;
}

function reveal(uint256 value, bytes32 salt) external {
    require(
        keccak256(abi.encodePacked(value, salt)) == commitments[msg.sender],
        "Invalid reveal"
    );
    // Process revealed value
}

---

Account Abstraction (Jan 2026)

Note: Adoption numbers and upgrade timelines change quickly. Verify current ERC-4337 ecosystem state and any EIP-7702 activation details with WebSearch before making recommendations.

ERC-4337 vs EIP-7702

Standard	Type	Key Feature	Use Case
ERC-4337	Smart contract wallets	Full AA without protocol changes	New wallets, DeFi, gaming
EIP-7702	EOA enhancement	EOAs execute smart contract code	Existing wallets, batch txns
ERC-6900	Modular accounts	Plugin management for AA wallets	Extensible wallet features

ERC-4337 Architecture:

User -> UserOperation -> Bundler -> EntryPoint -> Smart Account -> Target Contract
                          |
                          v
                      Paymaster (gas sponsorship)

EIP-7702 (Pectra Upgrade):

• EOAs can temporarily delegate to smart contracts
• Enables batch transactions, sponsored gas for existing addresses
• Complementary to ERC-4337 (uses same bundler/paymaster infra)
• Supported by Ambire, Trust Wallet, and growing

Key Capabilities:

• Gasless transactions: Paymasters sponsor gas in ERC-20 or fiat
• Batch operations: Multiple actions in single transaction
• Social recovery: Multi-sig or guardian-based key recovery
• Session keys: Limited permissions for dApps without full wallet access

Smart Wallet Development

// Minimal ERC-4337 Account (simplified)
import "@account-abstraction/contracts/core/BaseAccount.sol";

contract SimpleAccount is BaseAccount {
    address public owner;

    function validateUserOp(
        UserOperation calldata userOp,
        bytes32 userOpHash,
        uint256 missingAccountFunds
    ) external override returns (uint256 validationData) {
        // Verify signature
        require(_validateSignature(userOp, userOpHash), "Invalid sig");
        // Pay prefund if needed
        if (missingAccountFunds > 0) {
            (bool success,) = payable(msg.sender).call{value: missingAccountFunds}("");
            require(success);
        }
        return 0; // Valid
    }
}

---

Layer 2 Development (Jan 2026)

Note: L2 market share and risk stages change quickly. Use current data (for example, L2Beat and ecosystem dashboards) before stating rankings, TVL, or stage classifications.

L2 Selection Guide

L2	Type	Best For	Key Feature
Base	Optimistic	Consumer apps, mainstream adoption	Coinbase integration, low fees
Arbitrum	Optimistic	DeFi, mature ecosystem	Largest TVL, DAO grants
Optimism	Optimistic	Public goods, Superchain	OP Stack, grant programs
zkSync Era	ZK-Rollup	Fast finality, native AA	zkEVM, no withdrawal delay
StarkNet	ZK-Rollup	Cairo development, ZK-native	STARK proofs, custom VM

Enterprise Rollups (2025-2026 Trend)

Major institutions launching L2s on OP Stack:

• Kraken INK - Exchange-native L2
• Uniswap UniChain - DeFi-optimized
• Sony Soneium - Gaming and media
• Robinhood - Arbitrum integration

EIP-4844 Blob Optimization

Since March 2024, rollups use blob-based data posting:

Before: calldata posting -> expensive
After:  blob posting -> lower data availability cost

Optimism, zkSync optimized batching for blobs in 2025.

---

Common Mistakes (2025-2026)

Reality check: Exploits regularly cause large losses. Access control, signing/custody, and integration bugs remain top incident drivers.

Mistake	Impact	Prevention
Missing access control	Unauthorized admin actions	Use OpenZeppelin Ownable2Step, AccessControl
Reentrancy	Drain funds via callback	CEI pattern, ReentrancyGuard, Slither checks
Unchecked external calls	Silent failures	Always check return values, use SafeERC20
Integer overflow (pre-0.8)	Arbitrary value manipulation	Use Solidity 0.8.x+ (built-in checks)
Frontrunning	MEV extraction, sandwich attacks	Commit-reveal, Flashbots Protect, private mempool
Oracle manipulation	Price feed attacks	TWAP, multiple oracles, sanity bounds
Improper initialization	Proxy takeover	Use initializer modifier, _disableInitializers()
Storage collision (proxies)	Data corruption	Follow EIP-1967 slots, use OpenZeppelin upgrades

Anti-Patterns to Avoid

AVOID:

• Using tx.origin for authorization (phishing risk)
• Storing secrets on-chain (all data is public)
• Using block.timestamp for randomness (miner/validator influence)
• Ignoring return values from transfer/send
• Using deprecated tooling (Truffle/Ganache/Brownie)

BEST:

• Run static analysis on every change (for example, Slither and Aderyn)
• Add fuzz/invariant tests before any audit
• Use formal methods for high-value DeFi (for example, Certora and symbolic testing)

---

LLM Limitations in Smart Contracts

Do not rely on LLMs for:

• Security-critical logic verification
• Gas optimization calculations
• Complex mathematical proofs

Use LLMs for:

• Boilerplate generation (tests, docs)
• Code explanation and review prep
• Initial vulnerability hypotheses (verify manually)

---

When NOT to Use This Skill

• Traditional backend without blockchain -> Use software-backend
• Pure API design without Web3 -> Use dev-api-design
• General security without smart contracts -> Use software-security-appsec
• Frontend-only dApp UI -> Use software-frontend + Web3 libraries

---

Navigation

Resources

• references/blockchain-best-practices.md - Universal blockchain patterns and security
• references/backend-integration-best-practices.md - .NET/C# crypto integration patterns (CQRS, Kafka, multi-provider)
• references/solidity-best-practices.md - Solidity/EVM-specific guidance
• references/rust-solana-best-practices.md - Solana + Anchor patterns
• references/cosmwasm-best-practices.md - Cosmos/CosmWasm guidance
• references/ton-best-practices.md - TON contracts (Tact/Fift/FunC) and deployment
• references/defi-protocol-patterns.md - AMM, lending, staking, yield farming, flash loans, oracle integration
• references/nft-token-standards.md - ERC-20/721/1155, SPL Token, Metaplex, token gating, metadata
• references/cross-chain-bridges.md - Bridge architectures, LayerZero, Wormhole, IBC, security analysis
• ../software-security-appsec/references/smart-contract-security-auditing.md - Smart contract audit workflows and tools (see software-security-appsec skill)
• data/sources.json - Curated external references per chain
• Shared secure review checklist: ../software-clean-code-standard/assets/checklists/secure-code-review-checklist.md

Templates

• Ethereum/EVM: assets/ethereum/template-solidity-hardhat.md, assets/ethereum/template-solidity-foundry.md
• Solana: assets/solana/template-rust-anchor.md
• Cosmos: assets/cosmos/template-cosmwasm.md
• TON: assets/ton/template-tact-blueprint.md, assets/ton/template-func-blueprint.md
• Bitcoin: assets/bitcoin/template-bitcoin-core.md

Related Skills

• ../software-security-appsec/SKILL.md - Security hardening, threat modeling, OWASP vulnerabilities
• ../software-architecture-design/SKILL.md - System decomposition, modularity, dependency design
• ../ops-devops-platform/SKILL.md - Infrastructure, CI/CD, observability for blockchain nodes
• ../software-backend/SKILL.md - API integration with smart contracts, RPC nodes, indexers
• ../qa-resilience/SKILL.md - Resilience, circuit breakers, retry logic for chains
• ../software-code-review/SKILL.md - Code review patterns and quality gates
• ../dev-api-design/SKILL.md - RESTful design for Web3 APIs and dApp backends

---

Trend Awareness Protocol

IMPORTANT: When users ask recommendation questions about Web3/crypto development, you MUST use WebSearch to check current trends before answering.

Trigger Conditions

• "What's the best blockchain for [use case]?"
• "What should I use for [smart contracts/DeFi/NFTs]?"
• "What's the latest in Web3 development?"
• "Current best practices for [Solidity/auditing/gas optimization]?"
• "Is [chain/protocol] still relevant in 2026?"
• "[Ethereum] vs [Solana] vs [other L1/L2]?"
• "Best framework for [smart contract development]?"

Required Searches

1. Search: "Web3 development best practices 2026"
2. Search: "[Ethereum/Solana/Base] development updates 2026"
3. Search: "smart contract security 2026"
4. Search: "[Hardhat/Foundry] comparison 2026"

What to Report

After searching, provide:

• Current landscape: What chains/tools are popular NOW
• Emerging trends: New protocols or patterns gaining traction
• Deprecated/declining: Chains or approaches losing relevance
• Recommendation: Based on fresh data and ecosystem activity

Example Topics (verify with fresh search)

• L2 ecosystem growth (Base, Arbitrum, Optimism)
• Solidity vs Rust for smart contracts
• Foundry vs Hardhat tooling
• Account abstraction (ERC-4337) adoption
• Cross-chain bridges and interoperability
• DeFi security patterns and audit practices

---

Operational Playbooks

• references/operational-playbook.md - Smart contract architecture, security-first workflows, and platform-specific patterns

Fact-Checking

• Use web search/web fetch to verify current external facts, versions, pricing, deadlines, regulations, or platform behavior before final answers.
• Prefer primary sources; report source links and dates for volatile information.
• If web access is unavailable, state the limitation and mark guidance as unverified.