SA-01, SA-02, SA-03: Smart Contract Deployment Evidence, Audit Status, and Vulnerability Remediation Disclosure
Security claims are easy to make.
Security evidence is harder.
A serious launch platform cannot treat “we take security seriously” as a gate outcome. It needs to know what contracts exist, where they were deployed, whether they were reviewed, what the audit covered, what findings were discovered, and whether remediation was completed.
SA-01, SA-02, and SA-03 turn smart contract security from a marketing claim into evidence the Launch OS can evaluate.
Why security needs standards
Security is one of the areas where vague language creates the most risk.
Teams say they are audited. But who audited them? What was the scope? Which contracts were included? Were critical findings resolved? Was the deployment the same code that was reviewed? Were changes made after the audit?
Without structured standards, stakeholders are forced to interpret incomplete claims. Security & Assurance standards create a better model: define the required evidence, verify it, record the result, and tie progression to the outcome.
SA-01: Smart Contract Deployment Evidence
SA-01 asks whether the venture can provide deployment evidence.
This includes testnet or mainnet deployment references, contract addresses, chain context, deployment metadata, version linkage, and where appropriate, verification status. The platform should be able to distinguish between code that was described, code that was tested, code that was audited, and code that was deployed.
Deployment evidence prevents launch readiness from depending on screenshots or verbal assurances.
SA-02: Audit Status
SA-02 asks whether audit status is defined and evidenced.
An audit badge is not enough. The system needs to know the auditor, scope, date, contract coverage, severity summary, unresolved findings, and whether the audit applies to the code intended for launch.
Audit status should be a structured evidence object, not a logo on a landing page.
This does not mean every venture has identical audit requirements at every stage. It means the platform must know what assurance evidence exists and what gate decisions depend on it.
SA-03: Vulnerability Remediation Disclosure
SA-03 asks what happened after findings were identified.
An audit that finds issues is not a failure. Failing to disclose remediation status is the problem. Stakeholders need to know whether findings were fixed, accepted, mitigated, deferred, or still open.
Remediation disclosure should connect the finding, the response, the reviewer or approver, the affected contract or component, and the resulting status. This turns security review into an accountability trail.
How the three standards work together
SA-01 shows what exists. SA-02 shows what was reviewed. SA-03 shows how issues were handled.
Together, they reduce the most common security ambiguity: whether the system being launched is the same system that was reviewed and whether known issues were responsibly addressed.
That is the difference between security posture and security theater.
What investors should look for
Investors and stakeholders should ask practical questions.
- Which contracts were deployed and where?
- Were those contracts verified?
- Who audited them?
- What was the audit scope?
- What findings were discovered?
- What remediation was completed?
- Does the launch gate depend on unresolved risk?
These questions are not technical trivia. They determine whether security is reviewable.
Why gate enforcement matters
Security evidence matters only if it affects progression.
If a venture can advance despite missing deployment references, unclear audit status, or unresolved critical findings, then security standards are decorative. A Launch OS must be able to block, review, or remediate based on the evidence.
That is what makes SA standards operational.
Security cannot remain a slogan.
SA-01 requires deployment evidence.
SA-02 requires audit status.
SA-03 requires remediation disclosure.
Together, they make smart contract security inspectable before launch exposure begins.
That is how assurance becomes evidence.
This is how we Become Alpha.