Solana SPL Token Audits: What to Look For Before Launch
Solana SPL token audits are essential to understand the security posture of token contracts on the Solana network. This guide explains what auditors examine, how to read reports, and how to apply findings to risk decisions.
- What auditors look for in SPL token audits
- Common vulnerabilities in SPL token contracts
- Interpreting audit reports: disclosed vs undisclosed findings
- Best practices when evaluating audits
What auditors look for in SPL token audits
Auditors verify minting rules, pause/freeze capabilities, authority separation, and transfer restrictions to prevent abuse. They review access controls, upgradeability, and interaction with other programs on Solana. For a deeper lens on risk patterns, see the discussion on high-criticality vulnerabilities in smart contracts. The SPL Token standard is documented at the SPL token docs, which auditors use as a baseline.
Common vulnerabilities in SPL token contracts
Vulnerabilities often hinge on misapplied privileges, incorrect admin checks, or edge-case arithmetic. While re-entrancy is less common on Solana, you should watch for race conditions in minting, improper crowd control, and unbounded approvals. For a broader risk framework, see tokenomics risk signals and keep OWASP's smart-contract guidelines in view.
Interpreting audit reports: disclosed vs undisclosed findings
Audit reports separate publicly disclosed findings from latent risks. Undisclosed issues may exist; assess remediation timelines and validation tests. See how audit findings influence project viability in viability signals.
Best practices when evaluating audits
Look for multiple independent audits, check the scope alignment with your risk model, and prefer audits that provide remediation guidance. For broader governance lessons, explore security audits in AdTech contexts, and review the tokenomics angle tokenomics considerations.
External reference: SPL Token Docs and OWASP Smart Contract Security.
