> For the complete documentation index, see [llms.txt](https://dualguard.gitbook.io/dualguard/llms.txt). Markdown versions of documentation pages are available by appending `.md` to page URLs; this page is available as [Markdown](https://dualguard.gitbook.io/dualguard/security-reviews/protocol-teams.md). # Protocol Teams #### DualGuard for Protocol Teams Shipping onchain systems means shipping into an adversarial environment. Security work needs to assume motivated attackers, complex integrations, and real capital at stake. DualGuard focuses on pre-launch security reviews for protocol teams preparing a launch or a major upgrade. #### Security Review Contests DualGuard contests are structured public security reviews with clear rules, incentives, and judging. Many guards review the same scope in parallel and submit findings for validation. This model is strongest when you want broad scrutiny, measurable participation, and a clean set of judged findings before release. #### DualGuard’s approach DualGuard's security review flow is built in layers: * [Agentic Security Review Contests](/dualguard/security-reviews/security-reviews-for-protocol-teams/agentic-security-review-contests.md) * Traditional security review contests * [Mitigation Review](/dualguard/security-reviews/security-reviews-for-protocol-teams/mitigation-review.md) DualGuard also ensures the participation of 2 Lead Guards and 2 Lead Judges in the traditional contest flow. This keeps the review competitive while preserving quality standards in both discovery and judging. In practice, that means: * Early signal: the agentic contest helps surface obvious and semi-obvious issues before the broader contest begins. * Depth plus breadth: a traditional contest combines designated leads with many independent guards reviewing the same fixed scope. * Findings you can ship against: submissions are judged, deduplicated, and severity-assessed so your team receives a clean issue set instead of raw noise. * Fix verification: the engagement includes mitigation review so teams can launch with more confidence that patches are correct and do not introduce new risk. * Cost efficiency: DualGuard is designed so most of the security budget goes to the people doing the review work and prize-driven discovery. The pages in this section explain how to schedule a review, prepare a scope, support the contest while it runs, and complete remediation after the findings are finalized. To understand the full process, start with: * [Security Review Contest Timeline](/dualguard/security-reviews/protocol-teams/security-review-contest-timeline.md) * [Scheduling Process](/dualguard/security-reviews/protocol-teams/scheduling-process.md) * [Audit Contest Preparation](/dualguard/security-reviews/protocol-teams/security-review-contest-preparation.md) Request a security review here: