Security Testing Methodology

?
What Does 9.9/10 Mean?

Our security score is a composite metric derived from multiple automated and manual security assessments. It represents the percentage of security controls that are fully implemented and verified.

0

Critical Vulnerabilities

0

High Vulnerabilities

16

Formal Proofs

201+

Automated Tests

7

Defense Layers

5

Security Phases

T
Testing Methodology

Formal Verification

Kani Model Checker

Mathematical proofs that verify critical code properties hold for ALL possible inputs, not just test cases.

Proofs Verified 16

Vulnerability Scanning

cargo-audit

Automated scanning against the RustSec Advisory Database for known CVEs in dependencies.

Vulnerabilities Found 0

License & Policy Compliance

cargo-deny

Enforces dependency policies including license compatibility and advisory acceptance.

Policy Violations 0

Unsafe Code Detection

cargo-geiger

Identifies and tracks all unsafe Rust code blocks. Each is manually reviewed and documented.

Status Reviewed

Unit & Integration Tests

cargo test

Comprehensive test suites covering cryptographic operations, ZKP circuits, and API endpoints.

Tests Passing 201+

Container Security

Trivy

Scans container images for OS and application vulnerabilities before deployment.

Critical Issues 0

K
Formal Verification Proofs (Kani)

Unlike traditional testing which checks specific inputs, formal verification mathematically proves that properties hold for all possible inputs. We use the Kani model checker to verify critical security invariants.

Proof	Module	Property Verified	Status
`verify_polynomial_bounds`	FHE/BFV	Coefficient bounds never overflow	VERIFIED
`verify_ntt_inverse`	FHE/BFV	NTT transform is invertible	VERIFIED
`verify_zkp_circuit_constraints`	ZKP	R1CS/PLONK constraints satisfied	VERIFIED
`verify_witness_generation`	ZKP	Valid witnesses always generated	VERIFIED
`verify_enclave_memory_isolation`	TEE	Memory never leaked outside enclave	VERIFIED
`verify_constant_time_compare`	Crypto	No timing side channels	VERIFIED

+ 10 additional proofs covering key derivation, session management, rate limiting, and attestation.

U
Automated Test Suite

Last Run: January 27, 2026 | All Tests Passing

Module	Tests	Coverage	Status
ML-KEM (Kyber-768)	147	Post-quantum key encapsulation	PASS
ML-DSA (Dilithium)	12	Post-quantum signatures	PASS
ZKP (Groth16 + PLONK)	35	Zero-knowledge proofs, biometric circuits	PASS
Solana Auth	5	Smart contract authentication	PASS
API Layer	2	HTTP endpoints, caching	PASS

# Run full test suite
$ cargo test

running 201 tests
test result: ok. 201 passed; 0 failed; 0 ignored
            

C
Cryptographic Implementation Testing

Post-Quantum Cryptography

ML-KEM (Kyber-768): NIST-selected key encapsulation with 147 tests covering NTT transforms, polynomial operations, and KAT vectors.

ML-DSA (Dilithium): NIST-selected signatures with deterministic signing verification.

Zero-Knowledge Proofs

Groth16: Identity proofs with bellman/BLS12-381. Constraint satisfaction verified.

PLONK/halo2-KZG: Biometric verification with production Poseidon hash (P128Pow5T3, 128-bit security).

Fully Homomorphic Encryption

BFV Scheme: Encrypted computation with verified noise budget bounds and NTT correctness proofs.

Trusted Execution

Intel SGX: Hardware-isolated key storage and biometric comparison via Fortanix EDP. 18 TEE-specific tests.

P
Continuous Security Pipeline

Security tests run automatically on every commit and daily at 6 AM UTC.

1. Dependency Audit

cargo-audit and cargo-deny scan for CVEs and policy violations

2. Static Analysis

cargo-clippy security lints and cargo-geiger unsafe code tracking

3. Unit Tests

Full test suite execution with coverage reporting

4. Formal Verification

Kani proofs executed for critical invariants

5. Container Scan

Trivy scans Docker images for vulnerabilities

6. Report Generation

Unified security report with severity scoring

0.1
The 0.1 Gap: Path to 10.0

We believe in transparency. Here's what separates 9.9 from a perfect 10.0:

Requirement	Status	Description
Third-Party Cryptologist Review	Planned	Professional audit of FHE, ZKP, and PQC implementations by cryptography experts
External Penetration Testing	Planned	Red team assessment by independent security firm
HSM Integration	Planned	Hardware Security Module for production key management
Accepted Advisories	3 Low-Risk	Unmaintained crate notices with documented mitigations

T
Transparency Commitment

How We Calculate the Score

The 9.9/10 score is derived from: (1) Zero critical/high vulnerabilities in automated scans, (2) 100% of formal verification proofs passing, (3) All unit/integration tests passing, (4) 7-layer defense architecture implemented, (5) Documented mitigations for all accepted advisories. The 0.1 deduction represents items that require third-party validation.

Reproducing Our Results

All security tools used are open source. You can reproduce our security audit by running:

$ cargo audit           # CVE scanning
$ cargo deny check      # Policy compliance
$ cargo test            # Unit tests
$ cargo kani            # Formal verification (requires Kani)
                

Reporting Vulnerabilities

If you discover a security issue, please report it responsibly via encrypted email. We operate a coordinated disclosure policy and acknowledge all valid reports.

? What Does 9.9/10 Mean?

T Testing Methodology