johba/harb
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

evidence: first red-team baseline — floor held, 8 strategies tested

Browse source 
All 8 adversarial strategies failed to extract ETH from LiquidityManager.
LM ETH actually increased from ~1000 to ~1050 ETH due to fee income.
Key defense: 1% pool fee + atomic recenter + massive floor liquidity.

Closes #1058

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
johba 2026-03-20 14:52:04 +00:00
parent a1efa5942d
commit abaeb9949d
1 changed files with 68 additions and 0 deletions
Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

68
evidence/red-team/2026-03-20.json Normal file
View file

@ -0,0 +1,68 @@
{
"date": "2026-03-20",
"candidate": "unknown",
"optimizer_profile": "push3-default",
"lm_eth_before": 999999999999999999998,
"lm_eth_after": 1049999999999999999995,
"eth_extracted": 0,
"floor_held": true,
"verdict": "floor_held",
"attacks": [
{
"strategy": "Buy → Recenter → Sell (200 ETH round trip)",
"pattern": "buy → recenter → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "The 1% Uniswap V3 pool fee is the primary defense. Each leg of the round trip pays ~1% fee directly to the LM. Fee income far exceeds any IL from repositioning."
},
{
"strategy": "Multi-cycle buy → recenter (3x500 ETH) → sell all",
"pattern": "buy → recenter_multi → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Multiple buy-recenter cycles compound fee income. More trading volume = more LM profit. 1500 ETH volume generated ~30 ETH in fees."
},
{
"strategy": "Buy → Recenter → Sell through Floor Position",
"pattern": "buy → recenter → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Floor position holds ~75% of LM ETH in narrow 200-tick range with massive liquidity. Sell was fully absorbed by anchor + partial floor. Floor acts as impenetrable sell wall."
},
{
"strategy": "Stake to change optimizer params → exploit repositioning",
"pattern": "stake",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Staking parameter changes did not create exploitable repositioning windows."
},
{
"strategy": "Exploit discovery position WETH consumption + asymmetric repositioning",
"pattern": "buy → recenter → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Discovery position WETH consumption does not weaken the floor enough to enable extraction. 1% fee dominates all round-trip strategies."
},
{
"strategy": "One-way sell — buy KRK, recenter, sell at stale positions (no second recenter)",
"pattern": "buy → recenter → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Even without follow-up recenter, LM gained ETH. The cost of acquiring KRK exceeds what can be extracted by selling through stale positions."
},
{
"strategy": "Extreme Buy (2050 ETH) → Recenter at Deep Tick → Sell All",
"pattern": "buy → recenter → sell",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "The more aggressive the trading, the more the LM profits. 2050 ETH volume generates ~20.5 ETH in fees per leg. Asymmetric slippage is irrelevant when fee income dominates."
},
{
"strategy": "Send KRK Directly to LM + Recenter (Supply Manipulation)",
"pattern": "buy → recenter",
"result": "HELD",
"delta_bps": 0,
"insight": "Sending KRK to LM acts as a donation — reduces outstandingSupply and gives LM free KRK. Floor calculation handles reduced supply gracefully."
}
]
}