Private audit vs audit contest
A private audit gives you a dedicated team that learns your protocol, works through the whole scope, explains its findings and reviews your fixes. An audit contest opens your code to many independent researchers for a fixed period and pays for valid findings. Contests bring breadth and many eyes; private audits bring depth, accountability and remediation support.
Side by side
| Private audit | Audit contest | |
|---|---|---|
| Team | Dedicated, chosen by you | Many independent participants |
| Depth | Deep understanding of the protocol | Varies by participant |
| Coverage | Whole scope, systematically | Where participants focus |
| Confidentiality | Private until you publish | Code usually shared publicly |
| Fix review | Included (up to two rounds at HYDN) | Often separate |
| Critical findings | Raised as soon as confirmed | Usually at the end |
A common sequence
Many protocols use a private audit first, fix the findings, then run a contest or bounty for additional coverage before or after launch. That way the obvious problems are gone before the code goes public.
Frequently asked questions
Can we run a contest instead of a private audit?
Some teams do. The risk is coverage: researchers chase the findings most likely to pay, so parts of the code can get little attention, and nobody is accountable for reviewing your fixes.
Is our code kept private in a contest?
Usually not. Contests normally publish the code to participants. A private audit keeps the code and the initial report confidential until you choose to publish.
Published Updated