这是文章正文

这里是文章内容... asdpoamdapomsdpoasmpodmaspdomapsodmpoasmpdpoasdda

Introduction

Smart contract auditing is often described as finding bugs in code (after all, a bug report is the expected output).

But many of you may have already realized this:

Bugs are rarely just coding errors. They're broken assumptions. They're mismatches between the user's expectations, what the developer intended, and what the code actually does.

It's been shown time and time again: checklist-driven reviews are never enough. All top auditors eventually drop them. Instead, to uncover critical vulnerabilities and truly understand the code, they shift—consciously or not—toward a spec thinking mindset. One where checklists are made on the fly, born from uncovering assumptions and implicit rules.

This article introduces a minimalist but powerful framework I came up with, resulting from my years of work with Certora: The Three Prompts of Spec Thinking. It's a way to analyze code through a threat modeling lens. I hope it'll serve you well!

Other protocols (dependencies)
Other users (permissioned or not)
Yourself (as an attacker, alt account, or regular user)
The protocol itself (address(this))

👉 Try this cue: If it can be identified by an address, it's an actor.

What are ACTIONS?

An action is when an actor initiates interaction with the system. This triggers some logic that takes in:

Input parameters
State variables
External dependencies

…and produces:

State changes (on the Smart Contract itself or on external dependencies, like balances)
Returned values
Either a success or a revert

The flow may span multiple steps, touch multiple assets, or impact multiple actors.

🔗 I recommend re-reading my post here: https://justdravee.github.io/posts/thread-state-machine/

Contents

这是文章标题1

这是文章正文

Introduction

What Even Is a Smart Contract (From First Principles)?

What's an ASSET?

What's an ACTOR?

What are ACTIONS?