When AI Solves Security, Will DeFi Return to Its Golden Age?

marsbitPublicado a 2026-04-03Actualizado a 2026-04-03

Resumen

The article discusses how AI is revolutionizing DeFi security, potentially ushering in a new era of innovation reminiscent of the 2020 DeFi Summer. Previously, high security costs and lengthy audit processes stifled experimentation, as developers avoided unproven ideas due to financial and time constraints. However, AI tools like Nemesis are now drastically reducing these barriers by efficiently detecting complex vulnerabilities, such as reentrancy and economic attacks, with deep contextual understanding and low false positives. These tools, combined with platforms like Battlechain, enable a streamlined workflow: code is written, AI-audited within minutes, deployed on a test chain for real-world attack simulations, and quickly refined. This process compresses development cycles from months to hours at minimal cost. Future advancements may include wallet-integrated AI audits, allowing users to scan contracts in real-time before signing transactions. AI is set to transform DeFi security across development, chain, and user layers, reopening the door to rapid experimentation and innovation. This shift could empower individual developers to create groundbreaking protocols quickly and safely, much like the early pioneers of DeFi.

Written by: nour

Compiled by: Chopper, Foresight News

During the DeFi Summer of 2020, Andre Cronje was launching new protocols almost every week, with Yearn, Solidly, and a host of other experimental projects emerging. Unfortunately, many of these projects fell victim to contract vulnerabilities and economic attacks, resulting in losses. But the ones that survived have become some of the most important protocols today.

The problem is, that era left a psychological scar on the entire industry. The industry's focus shifted dramatically, pouring vast resources into security. Multiple audits, audit competitions, months of review for each version, all just to validate a new idea with no market fit. I think most people don't realize how much this stifled the spirit of experimentation. No one will spend $500,000 and wait 6 months for an audit for an unproven idea. So everyone just clones verified designs and calls it innovation. DeFi innovation hasn't died; it's just that the incentives are killing it.

And this is changing because AI is driving down security costs at an astonishing rate.

AI audits used to be laughably shallow, basically only flagging surface-level issues like reentrancy and precision loss that any competent auditor could spot. But the new generation of tools is completely different. Tools like Nemesis can already detect complex execution flow vulnerabilities and economic attacks, demonstrating a stunning depth of contextual understanding of the protocol and its operating environment. One particularly standout feature of Nemesis is how it handles false positives: it uses multiple agents to detect issues with different methods, then has another independent agent judge the results, filtering out false positives based on contextual understanding of the protocol's logic and goals. It truly understands nuances, like in which scenarios reentrancy is acceptable and when it's truly dangerous—something even experienced human auditors often get wrong.

Nemesis is also incredibly simple, requiring just three Markdown files added as a skill to Claude Code. Other tools go even further, some integrating symbolic execution and static analysis, others even automatically writing formal verification specifications and verifying the code. Formal verification is becoming accessible to everyone.

But these are just first-generation tools. The models themselves are continuously evolving. Anthropic's upcoming Mythos is expected to far surpass the capabilities of Opus 4.6. You don't need to make any changes; just run Nemesis on Mythos and immediately get stronger results.

Combined with Cyfrin's Battlechain, the entire security workflow is completely restructured: write code → audit with AI tools → deploy to Battlechain → live attack and defense testing → redeploy to mainnet.

The beauty of Battlechain is that it eliminates the implied 'safety expectation' of the Ethereum mainnet. All users bridging in are fully aware of the risks they are taking. It also provides a natural focal point for AI auditors, no longer needing to search for a needle in the mainnet haystack. Its safe harbor framework stipulates that 10% of stolen funds can be a legitimate bounty, creating an economic incentive that drives the development of more powerful attack tools. Essentially, this is competition similar to MEV, but happening in the security realm. AI agents will probe every new deployment at top speed, racing to find vulnerabilities.

The future process for DeFi protocol development will be:

  1. Write the protocol
  2. Complete an AI audit in minutes
  3. Deploy to Battlechain with a small amount of capital
  4. Get automatically targeted by competing AI agents
  5. Get attacked within minutes
  6. Recover 90% of funds
  7. Fix the vulnerability
  8. Redeploy

The entire cycle, from writing code to being battle-tested and deployed on the mainnet, is compressed from months to potentially just hours, with costs almost negligible compared to traditional audits.

The ultimate line of defense will be wallet-level AI auditing. User wallets can integrate the same AI audit tools at the transaction signing stage. Before signing each transaction, the AI will audit the target contract code, read state variables to link all relevant contracts, map out the protocol topology, understand the context, audit both the contract and the user's transaction input, and provide recommendations in the confirmation pop-up. Every user will ultimately run their own professional-grade audit agent, protecting themselves from rugs, team negligence, or malicious frontends.

Agents will protect DeFi protocols from all angles: development, public chain, and user layers. This reopens the entire experimental design space. Ideas that were once economically unviable due to high security costs can finally be tested. One person in their bedroom can iterate quickly and create billion-dollar protocols, just as Andre and others did in 2020. The era of live testing is back.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the main factor that stifled innovation in DeFi after the 2020 DeFi Summer, according to the article?

AThe article states that the industry's shift towards pouring massive resources into security, such as requiring multiple audits, audit competitions, and months of review for each new version, significantly stifled the experimental spirit. The high cost (e.g., $500,000) and long wait times (e.g., 6 months) for auditing unproven ideas killed innovation, leading to mostly forking of verified designs.

QHow is AI currently changing the security cost and process for DeFi protocol development?

AAI is drastically reducing security costs and speeding up the process. New-generation tools like Nemesis can find complex execution flow vulnerabilities and economic attacks with deep contextual understanding. The future development process involves writing code, getting an AI audit in minutes, deploying to a test environment like Battlechain for real-world attacks, and then deploying to mainnet, compressing a months-long cycle into potentially just hours.

QWhat is the specific role of a tool like 'Battlechain' in the new security workflow described?

ABattlechain, specifically mentioned as Cyfrin's Battlechain, is a test environment that restructures the security workflow. It eliminates the implicit 'safety expectation' of the Ethereum mainnet, provides a natural focal point for AI auditors, and has a 'safe harbor' framework where 10% of stolen funds are a legal bounty. This creates economic incentives for powerful attack tools to emerge, allowing protocols to be tested and attacked by competing AI agents quickly before mainnet deployment.

QWhat is the envisioned final line of defense for user security in DeFi ecosystem according to the article?

AThe final line of defense is wallet-level AI auditing. User wallets would integrate the same AI audit tools to audit the target contract's code, read state variables, understand the protocol's topology and context, and audit both the contract and the user's transaction input *before* the user signs the transaction. A recommendation would then be shown in the confirmation pop-up, allowing each user to run their own professional-grade audit agent for protection.

QHow does the article suggest tools like 'Nemesis' handle false positives in smart contract auditing?

ANemesis handles false positives by having multiple AI agents check for issues using different methods. Then, a separate, independent AI agent acts as a judge to filter out the false positives based on its contextual understanding of the protocol's logic and goals. This allows it to understand nuances, such as when reentrancy might be acceptable versus when it is truly dangerous, a task that even experienced human auditors often get wrong.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Saeed Al-Marri: How Tokenization Unlocks New Opportunities for Shipping Funds

Said Al-Marri: How Tokenization Opens New Opportunities for Shipping Funds For centuries, commercial shipping has been a capital-intensive asset class limited to institutional funds and shipping dynasties. Said bin Saleh Al-Marri, CEO of Ethra Invest and Ethra Ship, aims to break down these barriers by combining Real World Asset (RWA) tokenization with conservative private equity principles. This bridges decentralized finance (DeFi) with the physical realities of global trade. Tokenization allows fractional ownership of ships on a blockchain, giving smaller investors access to previously inaccessible markets. However, Al-Marri warns it is not a regulatory loophole or a cure for asset illiquidity. The core physical risks are isolated in Special Purpose Vehicles (SPVs) for qualified investors. While tokenization enhances transparency and ownership record-keeping, Al-Marri stresses that a liquid secondary market depends on transparent asset valuation and must not interfere with ship operations managed by professionals. Regarding legal enforcement, smart contracts cannot physically seize a ship. Legal recourse still relies on traditional maritime courts, ship mortgages, and flag state laws, with blockchain records needing to mirror legal ownership in the SPV perfectly. Beyond ownership, the industry faces administrative hurdles like paper-based bills of lading. Al-Marri argues the bottleneck is legal and operational standardization, not technology. He advocates for a hybrid model combining digital trade documents and programmable settlements with support from regulated financial institutions, rather than a full crypto replacement for tools like Letters of Credit. A major challenge is decarbonizing the global fleet by 2050. Transitioning to green fuels requires massive upfront investment. Al-Marri emphasizes a conservative, holistic approach to underwriting these projects, evaluating technology, fuel availability, safety, and resale value. Investments must be justified under conservative forecasts, not just optimistic ones. By combining pragmatic risk management with digital infrastructure, leaders like Al-Marri show that the evolution of maritime finance is about mobilizing capital to build a modernized and sustainable global fleet, not just putting ships on a blockchain.

cryptonews.ruHace 14 min(s)

Saeed Al-Marri: How Tokenization Unlocks New Opportunities for Shipping Funds

cryptonews.ruHace 14 min(s)

Six Years Later, UNI Finally Welcomes Its Own "Buyback Bull"

After years of debate, Uniswap's UNI token has finally entered a 'buyback bull' phase following the long-awaited activation of its fee-switch mechanism. The UNIfication proposal, executed in December 2025, redirected a portion of protocol fees from select pools and Unichain sequencer revenue into a treasury (TokenJar) dedicated to buying back and permanently burning UNI. Initial market reaction was muted due to modest early burn rates. A significant shift occurred in July 2026 with the launch of Robinhood Chain. Uniswap's immediate deployment there skyrocketed trading volume, making it a top fee-generator. Subsequently, governance votes extended the fee mechanism to v4 pools and Robinhood Chain, causing protocol revenue to nearly triple. Daily funds directed to UNI burns rose sharply, with Robinhood Chain contributing over half. This transitioned UNI's narrative from a governance token to a cash-flow asset backed by a perpetual automatic buyer. UNI's price, which had languished around $2.30 in early June, nearly doubled to approach $4.60 by late July. Analysts credit this to the tangible cash flow from fees rather than mere speculation. Unlike many newer projects where buybacks are offset by large investor unlocks, UNI's six-year history has resulted in a widely distributed and relatively clean supply, allowing the buyback pressure to effectively impact the secondary market. The key test will be whether trading activity, particularly on Robinhood Chain, sustains after its initial gas subsidies expire.

marsbitHace 20 min(s)

Six Years Later, UNI Finally Welcomes Its Own "Buyback Bull"

marsbitHace 20 min(s)

Only 153 Venture Capital Firms Invested in July: Is the Crypto VC Industry Experiencing a 'Mass Extinction'?

In July 2026, only 153 unique venture capital firms participated in disclosed crypto funding rounds, marking the lowest monthly count since November 2020. This figure represents an 87% decline from the peak of 1,177 firms in 2022. Overall, the first seven months of 2026 saw crypto projects raise approximately $11.78 billion across 481 rounds. This crypto VC contraction contrasts sharply with the broader venture capital landscape, where global VC investment reached a record $560.4 billion in H1 2026, heavily fueled by major AI company financings. This shift in capital allocation has drawn funds away from the crypto sector. Within crypto, funding is highly concentrated. Trading platforms, prediction markets, and payment sectors absorbed 53% of the total capital. While early-stage deals remain frequent, the largest sums flow to a few late-stage rounds and mergers & acquisitions, which surged to $7.23 billion in Q2 2026. The market is consolidating around top funds like a16z crypto and Dragonfly, which successfully raised new multi-billion dollar funds, while many smaller firms have retreated. Analysts describe this as a "great extinction" for crypto VCs, where capital is becoming more selective, favoring proven business models and assets over early-stage speculation. This raises the bar for project quality, funding efficiency, and viable exit paths.

marsbitHace 40 min(s)

Only 153 Venture Capital Firms Invested in July: Is the Crypto VC Industry Experiencing a 'Mass Extinction'?

marsbitHace 40 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片