PolkaStarter Partners Up with CoinTerminal for Smart Contract Security

We started Polkastarter in 2020 as one of the first decentralized launchpads in crypto. By 2024, we had helped launch over 110 projects and made it through a market crash that wiped out 60% of our competitors.

But surviving the bear market only got us halfway. The next challenge was implementing secure cross-chain token transfers without losing user funds or introducing vulnerabilities that would destroy the credibility we'd fought to preserve.

Cross-chain token operations are among the highest-risk activities in Web3. You're moving value between entirely different execution environments. One mistake in contract logic, one unaudited edge case, and you hand attackers a blueprint for draining millions.

We were facing challenges with cross-chain token transfers and needed a secure, proven solution. That's when we discovered CoinTerminal had already solved this exact problem in their own production environment.

The Cross-Chain Challenge We Faced

By early 2024, Polkastarter operated across multiple chains, primarily Binance Smart Chain and Ethereum. We were facing significant challenges with cross-chain token transfers, affecting our ability to serve users across different blockchain environments effectively.

The technical complexity was substantial. Cross-chain transfers necessitate reliable communication between distinct execution environments that differ in their finality assumptions, gas mechanics, and security models. When tokens move between chains, you need absolute certainty that the lock on one side corresponds precisely to the mint on the other side.

The business risk was even more significant. Users trust platforms based on demonstrated competence. Security failures during cross-chain operations don't just cost money; they also destroy trust permanently. We'd watched platforms recover from market downturns but never recover from preventable security incidents.

We needed a proven solution that had functioned reliably in production environments under real-world conditions.

Why We Approached CoinTerminal

CoinTerminal operates one of crypto's most successful launchpads, having grown to over 650,000 users and facilitated more than $80 million in token distribution during the bear market that devastated competitors.

CoinTerminal wasn't the first firm we considered for cross-chain implementation guidance. The difference was that they'd already solved this exact problem on their own platform.

CoinTerminal had successfully implemented cross-chain functionality in production for their vesting and contribution contracts. This wasn't theoretical expertise; it was operational infrastructure handling real user funds across multiple chains in live production.

More importantly, CoinTerminal pioneered the first non-token-gated launchpad in the space, removing barriers that prevented ordinary users from accessing quality projects.

We observed their implementation functioning reliably. We saw how tCoinTerminal had structured cross-chain communication and understood the technical decisions they'd made.

When we approached CoinTerminal, we weren't asking them to figure out cross-chain transfers from scratch. We were asking them to share the approach that already worked in their production environment and help us implement similar infrastructure.

This distinction matters enormously in Web3. The space is full of consultants who've never operated platforms. CoinTerminal's credibility came from demonstrated capability in its own platform, serving hundreds of thousands of users.

CoinTerminal's Recommendation

Based on their successful implementation, CoinTerminal recommended using Axelar as the core cross-chain communication layer for our token transfers.

Axelar provides a cross-chain communication infrastructure allowing smart contracts on different blockchains to interact securely. When a user locks tokens on one chain, Axelar enables contracts on another chain to verify that lock and mint corresponding tokens. This solves the fundamental coordination problem in cross-chain operations by ensuring actions on one chain reliably trigger corresponding actions on another chain.

CoinTerminal's recommendation wasn't generic. They'd implemented Axelar for their vesting and contribution contracts specifically. CoinTerminal understood Axelar's security model, its message verification mechanisms, its handling of chain finality assumptions, and its operational characteristics under production load.

More importantly, CoinTerminal understood where vulnerabilities could appear in Axelar-based implementations. Cross-chain communication introduces attack surfaces that don't exist in single-chain contracts. Message ordering assumptions, finality delays, validator behavior, and economic incentives all affect security. CoinTerminal had already worked through these considerations in its own implementation.

The recommendation came with practical implementation guidance. CoinTerminal explained how to structure contracts to work with Axelar effectively, how to handle edge cases like failed messages or chain reorganizations, how to test cross-chain functionality before production deployment, and how to monitor operations once live.

This wasn't theoretical architecture. This was operational knowledge from someone who'd built and operated the exact infrastructure we needed.

CoinTerminal's Audit Network and Partner Selection

Recommending Axelar solved the technical architecture question. But implementation required independent security validation from auditors who understood cross-chain security deeply.

CoinTerminal connected us with an audit partner specializing in cross-chain architecture. This wasn't random matchmaking. CoinTerminal maintains an extensive network of independent audit firms across different specializations. This network includes firms with expertise in cross-chain architecture, DeFi protocols, token implementations, and various blockchain ecosystems. CoinTerminal's audit advisory service leverages these relationships to match projects with auditors who have relevant technical expertise.

The introduction came with context. CoinTerminal explained what Omniscia would examine, how to prepare contracts for efficient review, what documentation would accelerate the audit process, and how to structure the engagement to maximize value.

This advisory layer provided multiple benefits beyond the auditor introduction itself.

Audit Preparation

CoinTerminal helped us assess audit readiness before engaging their recommended partner. Audit-ready contracts have comprehensive documentation explaining intended behavior, edge cases, and assumptions. They include inline comments describing non-obvious logic. They're structured so auditors can review efficiently without spending days deciphering basic intent.

For our POLS token transfers, this meant documenting exactly how Axelar's cross-chain messaging functioned in our implementation, what assumptions we made about message ordering and finality, how we handled edge cases like failed messages or chain reorganizations, and what economic incentives prevented exploitation.

This preparation happened before Omniscia saw our contracts, which meant auditors focused on discovering vulnerabilities rather than understanding basic architecture.

Scope Definition

CoinTerminal helped us define an efficient audit scope matching our technical requirements. Too narrow, and you leave critical components unaudited. Too broad, and you pay for unnecessary review of standard implementations.

The scope covered our cross-chain token transfer contracts, the Axelar integration enabling cross-chain verification, and the novel aspects of our implementation requiring specialized attention. Standard components using battle-tested implementations received a lighter review. Novel cross-chain coordination logic received deep examination.

This targeting produced focused audits covering high-risk components thoroughly rather than a surface-level review of everything.

Timeline Coordination

Token operations require precise coordination. You need completed audits before deploying contracts. You need deployed contracts before announcing timelines to users. You need operational windows that coordinate with exchange activity, liquidity transitions, and community communication.

CoinTerminal coordinated audit scheduling with our operational milestones, ensuring the security review was completed before our planned deployment without blocking development progress or forcing rushed reviews.

What CoinTerminal's Audit Partner Delivered

Omniscia conducted comprehensive security reviews of our cross-chain token transfer contracts, including the Axelar integration and token implementation logic.

The audit process identified findings across multiple severity categories. Some were minor documentation gaps or style inconsistencies. Others represented medium-severity issues affecting contract behavior under specific conditions. A few indicated higher-severity concerns requiring immediate attention.

This is standard for professional audits. The goal isn't zero findings. The goal is to discover and address vulnerabilities before deployment. Clean audits with zero findings often indicate insufficient depth rather than perfect code.

We systematically worked through the audit’s findings, implementing fixes for identified issues, improving documentation where necessary, and adjusting implementation details based on their recommendations. The auditors reviewed our fixes, verified proper remediation, and issued the final audit report.

The audit deliverables included detailed technical reports documenting their methodology, findings categorized by severity, specific code references, remediation recommendations, and post-fix verification. These reports provided evidence we could share with exchanges, partners, and community members demonstrating proper security validation.

Why CoinTerminal's Approach Works

The value CoinTerminal provided extended beyond connecting us with a competent audit firm. Three aspects of their approach proved particularly valuable.

First: CoinTerminal had solved the problem itself. CoinTerminal's recommendation came from operational experience, not theoretical knowledge. They'd implemented Axelar-based cross-chain transfers in production. CoinTerminal understood what worked, what failed, and why. This credibility changed the dynamic entirely. We weren't paying for advice. We were learning from demonstrated success.

Second: CoinTerminal understood the full context. CoinTerminal knew that security audits serve multiple purposes beyond finding bugs. Audits provide validation for exchanges and partners. They create accountability structures internally. CoinTerminal educates development teams. CoinTerminal structured our engagement with Omniscia to maximize these secondary benefits, not just the primary security validation.

Third: CoinTerminal treated audit advisory as strategic infrastructure. Most projects approach audits reactively, engaging auditors after building and hoping for a quick turnaround. CoinTerminal treated audit preparation, scope definition, and timeline coordination as strategic activities deserving the same attention as technical architecture. This produced better audits at lower cost with less friction.

For Polkastarter, working with CoinTerminal meant we implemented a proven solution rather than experimenting with novel approaches. We engaged the right auditors with relevant expertise. We prepared properly, which produced efficient reviews. We coordinated timelines proactively, which prevented compressed schedules or delayed launches.

The outcome was secure cross-chain token transfers functioning reliably in production, validated by independent auditors with specialized expertise, implemented without security incidents or operational disruptions.

Lessons for Web3 Projects Planning Cross-Chain Operations

We learned several lessons from this process that apply broadly to Web3 projects planning technically complex operations.

Work with operators who've solved your problem already. The difference between CoinTerminal and typical advisory firms was operational credibility. CoinTerminal had built and operated the infrastructure we needed. This meant recommendations came from demonstrated success rather than theoretical expertise. When evaluating advisors, prioritize proven operational experience over consulting credentials.

Treat security validation as strategic infrastructure, not compliance. Projects approaching audits as checkboxes get checkbox results. We approached security validation as a strategic activity deserving proper preparation, scope definition, and timeline coordination. This produced better audits serving multiple purposes, such as security validation, partner confidence, team education, and operational credibility.

Prepare contracts before formal audits begin. Audit-ready documentation, code structure, and internal testing save significant audit time and cost. CoinTerminal's preparation guidance and auditor selection proved essential to this outcome. The audit proceeded efficiently because CoinTerminal had matched us with the right specialized partner and helped us prepare properly.

Match auditors to technical requirements. Not all audit firms have equivalent expertise across protocol types. Cross-chain architecture requires a different specialization than DeFi protocols or token contracts. CoinTerminal's auditor network provided access to firms with relevant expertise we wouldn't have identified ourselves.

Coordinate timelines proactively. Waiting until implementation completes before engaging auditors creates compressed schedules and limited options. We aligned audit timelines with operational milestones early, which prevented rushed reviews or delayed launches.

Why Proven Solutions Matter More Than Theory

The Web3 industry entered 2025 with fundamentally different conditions than existed during 2020-2021. Capital is scarcer. Users are more sophisticated. Competition is more intense. The margin for error decreased substantially.

Security failures that platforms survived during bull markets now produce terminal outcomes. Users who forgave hacks when speculation drove behavior have zero tolerance when capital preservation determines success or failure.

Cross-chain operations represent a particularly high risk. You're coordinating multiple execution environments. You're implementing complex communication protocols. You're touching user funds at scale. The technical complexity creates numerous attack surfaces.

Working with advisors who've already solved your technical problem changes the risk profile entirely. CoinTerminal's cross-chain infrastructure functioned reliably in production before we implemented a similar architecture. This wasn't theoretical guidance. This was proven operational knowledge.

For projects planning cross-chain operations, the infrastructure exists to validate your work properly. The audit firms exist. The advisory support exists. The question isn't whether you can get competent audits and proven solutions. The question is whether you'll invest in them before deployment or after exploitation.

We chose proven solutions validated by independent auditors. It made all the difference.