Security Program Maturity for Protocol Teams¶
A mature protocol security program turns audits, monitoring, incident response, bounties, launch gates, and executive evidence into a repeatable operating model.
Review questions¶
- Which controls block launch, and which are monitored after launch?
- Who owns each asset, accepted risk, emergency action, and evidence source?
- Can leadership see security trend and investment needs before an incident?
Review workflow¶
- Inventory assets, controls, owners, evidence, and cadence.
- Turn launch checklists into recurring monitoring gates.
- Publish quarterly evidence with incidents, exceptions, trends, and open investments.
- Threat-model new roadmap items before implementation.
Maturity levels¶
| Level | Description | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Ad hoc | Security depends on individual memory and urgency. | Unowned issues, stale docs, no recurring review. |
| Launch-gated | Audits, launch gates, and signer controls exist. | Audit package, gate results, signer policy. |
| Monitored | Drift, incidents, bounties, and accepted risks are reviewed. | Alerts, risk register, response records. |
| Governed | Security investment is tied to evidence and roadmap change. | Quarterly review, metrics, funded controls. |
Linked checklists¶
FAQ¶
What is the first maturity step? Create a control map with owner, evidence, review cadence, and launch or monitoring status.
How should founders use this? Use maturity evidence to decide what blocks launch, what can be accepted temporarily, and what needs budget.