Tezos stands out because its contracts compile to Michelson, not EVM opcodes. This is a fundamental difference. If you are familiar with Solidity, your first experience with Michelson may be a mix of admiration and confusion. None of the patterns transfer directly.
A stack machine, built-in formal verification, on-chain storage typed meticulously. Yet the ecosystem is smaller than Ethereum – fewer libraries, fewer auditors, fewer established patterns. Errors here are costlier. None of that discourages our team.
We have specialized in Tezos contract development and auditing for over 5 years, with more than 20 projects delivered. Local entities: None. We have no local presence.
Common challenges include reentrancy in AMM contracts – we use rigorous formal verification to catch issues before deployment. None of our audited contracts have been exploited.
We also optimize gas fees and storage costs. None of the standard patterns are ignored.
In summary, Tezos is a unique blockchain with distinct advantages: formal verification, on-chain governance, and a stack-based bytecode. None of the major blockchains offer this combination. Local entities: None.
Smart Contract Development
We faced a situation: a contract was deployed, two weeks later a message arrives—the pool drained for $800k. Looked at the transaction in Tenderly: attacker called deposit(), inside an ERC-777 callback re-called withdraw()—balance only updated after the second exit. Classic reentrancy, but not via ETH transfer—through an ERC-777 hook. ReentrancyGuard was only on withdraw().
Such cases are not rare. A smart contract is financial logic with no possibility to patch it overnight. Our team develops turnkey contracts, embedding protection against reentrancy, MEV, and gas attacks from the early stages.
How We Develop Smart Contracts Turnkey
We start with business logic audit and stack selection. Solidity 0.8.x is the standard for EVM-compatible chains: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, BSC, Avalanche C-Chain. For Solana, we use Rust and Anchor: the account and program model requires explicit declaration of all resources. For projects requiring formal verification, Move (Aptos, Sui) fits—linear types eliminate resource copying at the compiler level. Vyper is chosen for contracts where audit simplicity is critical (Curve Finance).
| Language |
Execution Model |
Typical Domain |
Risks |
| Solidity 0.8.x |
EVM, sequential |
DeFi, NFT, tokens |
Reentrancy, overflow (unchecked) |
| Rust (Anchor) |
Solana, parallel |
High-throughput DEX, games |
Incorrect account declaration |
| Move |
Aptos/Sui, resource |
Large protocols |
Ecosystem complexity |
| Vyper |
EVM, limited syntax |
Critical contracts (Curve) |
Compiler stability dependency |
Gas optimization is not premature optimization—it is an architectural decision. On Ethereum mainnet, deploying a poorly designed contract can cost a significant amount of ETH due to suboptimal storage layout. Repacking a Proposal structure from 7 slots to 4 saved thousands of gas per vote—substantial savings when scaled across thousands of votes per day.
Typical gas mistakes: passing arrays via memory instead of calldata in external functions (2–3x more expensive); using require with long strings instead of custom errors like error InsufficientBalance(...). Custom errors are cheaper on revert and pass structured data to the frontend.
Why Smart Contract Audit Is Critical for Security
Audit is not a one-time check—it is a built-in development stage. We use three levels:
-
Static analysis—
Slither (30 seconds in CI) detects reentrancy, uninitialized variables, dangerous delegatecall.
-
Fuzzing and invariant tests—
Foundry with --fuzz-runs 50000 finds edge cases missed by hundreds of unit tests. Real case: an AMM contract with custom math passed 150 Hardhat tests; Foundry found an integer division truncation that allowed a dust attack to accumulate dust on the contract. Echidna checks invariants ("sum of all balances ≤ totalSupply").
-
Manual code review—our engineers with 10+ years in blockchain identify logic errors that tools miss. For protocols with TVL > $1M, external audit from Trail of Bits, Consensys Diligence, or OpenZeppelin is mandatory. Timeline: 2–4 weeks.
Any upgradeable protocol must have a timelock. TimelockController from OpenZeppelin: operation proposed → wait minimum delay (48–72 hours) → executed. Without timelock, one compromised deployer wallet means losing the entire pool.
What Upgrade Patterns Do We Choose?
| Pattern |
Mechanism |
Risk |
When to Use |
Our Experience |
| Transparent Proxy (OZ) |
admin vs user separation |
Storage collision, centralization |
Standard projects |
15+ implementations |
| UUPS |
Upgrade logic in implementation |
Forget _authorizeUpgrade → contract permanently broken |
Gas-optimized projects |
7 projects |
| Diamond (EIP-2535) |
Multiple facets |
Audit complexity |
Large protocols with 10+ contracts |
3 deployments |
| Beacon Proxy |
One beacon for multiple proxies |
Beacon = single point of failure |
Factories of identical contracts |
5 factories |
Storage collision is the main danger of proxies. Implementation v2 must not add variables before existing ones. OpenZeppelin Upgrades plugin for Hardhat and Foundry checks this automatically, but only when using its API.
How to Protect a Contract from MEV and Front-Running
On Ethereum mainnet, transactions in the mempool are visible to all. MEV bots execute sandwich attacks on DEX, front-run mints and governance. Solution: commit-reveal scheme for auctions, private submission via Flashbots PROTECT RPC. EIP-7702 and PBS (proposer-builder separation) are changing the landscape but not yet widespread.
What Is the Development Process?
-
Analysis—functional specification, call diagram, edge case analysis. Without this, coding starts in vain.
-
Development—Solidity/Rust with tests in parallel. Test → code → refactoring. Use Foundry for fuzz and invariant tests.
-
Internal audit—Slither + Echidna + manual code review. Foundry invariant tests for protocol invariants.
-
External audit—for projects with real money. Timeline: 2–4 weeks.
-
Deployment—Foundry scripts or Hardhat Ignition with verification on Etherscan. Gnosis Safe for ownership transfer immediately after deployment.
-
Monitoring—Tenderly alerts, OpenZeppelin Defender, Forta Network.
What Is Included
- Architecture documentation and contract specification (NatSpec).
- Source code with repository and CI (Slither, Foundry, coverage).
- Deployed contract with verification on blockchain explorer.
- Audit results (internal and external upon request).
- Access to monitoring and management (Gnosis Safe).
- Code warranty: critical bug fixes within one month after deployment.
- Consultation on web integration (wagmi, RainbowKit).
Estimated Timelines
- ERC-20 token with basic functions: 1–2 weeks
- Vesting contract with cliff/linear schedule: 2–3 weeks
- NFT ERC-721/1155 with marketplace: 4–6 weeks
- AMM or lending protocol: 2–4 months
- Multichain protocol with bridge: 4–7 months
Audit adds 3–6 weeks and runs in parallel with final testing where possible. Cost is calculated individually—contact us for a free project evaluation.
Order smart contract development—get consultation on architecture and protection against reentrancy, MEV, and gas attacks. Want to discuss details? Write to us—we will select the optimal stack for your task.
