Who audited this crypto project, in short: open the project's page on NAUT and read whether it carries an audit flag, open the project's own documentation and list every audit it names with the firm beside it, then follow 1 of those reports back to the firm that signed it. NAUT tracks 293 published company rows carrying an audit flag as of 7 November 2026, and run on 1 of them, Hyperlane, those 3 steps returned 14 named audits by 9 firms, with the Protocol v3 Audit traced to Trail of Bits and a report dated September 2023 sitting in that firm's own publications repository.
Data note. The NAUT figures here were read from NAUT's own database on 7 November 2026, read-only: 293 live company rows carry the audit flag, Hyperlane is 1 of them, it sits at the high trust tier with 1 sector tag (Infrastructure) and 27 chain tags, and NAUT names 3 Co-Founders plus a core engineering row on its team, and it names a CEO and a Director on the Trail of Bits row. The 14 audit entries come from Hyperlane's own audits documentation page, fetched on 7 and 8 November 2026, and all 14 headings came back on that fetch. 3 of the 14 entries had their named firm and report link quoted off that page (Protocol v1, Protocol v2 and Protocol v3), and 1 of those 3, the Trail of Bits report, was opened at the firm's own repository and loaded. The other 11 entries are named on Hyperlane's page and were not followed to a second host, so read them as what the project publishes about itself. NAUT Research wrote this, and worked 1 project out of the 293, so nothing here is a count across the whole flagged set.
Who audited this crypto project, in 3 steps
The question has a short answer at most projects and a long one at the rest, and the order of the steps is what keeps it short.
- Step 1 is a yes or no. NAUT's audit flag is a field on the company row, and 293 published rows carried it on 7 November 2026. It tells you an audit exists on file and names no firm.
- Step 2 is where the firm names live. A project that has paid for work almost always lists it in its own documentation, with a heading per audit and a link per report.
- Step 3 is the part most readers skip. A link in a project's own repository is the project's copy. The same report on the firm's own site or repository is the firm saying it did the work.
- A heading is not a grade. None of the 14 entries on Hyperlane's page carries a pass mark, and 3 of the 14 are labelled Mirror rather than Original on the page itself.
- Read the NAUT row293 published company rows carried an audit flag on 7 November 2026, Hyperlane among them.
- List the project's own entriesHyperlane's audits page named 14 audits by 9 firms when it was fetched on 8 November 2026.
- Follow 1 report to its firmThe Protocol v3 Audit led to Trail of Bits and a September 2023 report in that firm's own repository.
Step 1: read the audit flag on the NAUT row
Open the project on NAUT and look for the audit flag before you read anything else. It is a true or false field, it was set on 293 of NAUT's published company rows on 7 November 2026, and it is the fastest way to find out whether there is anything to go looking for. Hyperlane carries it, along with a high trust tier, 1 sector tag and 27 chain tags.
What the flag does not do is name a firm, which is why step 2 exists. Treat a set flag as a lead worth 10 minutes and an unset flag as a question for the founder.
Step 2: list every audit the project names itself
Go to the project's own documentation and find its audits or security page. Hyperlane publishes 1, and a fetch of it on 8 November 2026 returned 14 entries: Hyperlane Q2 2025, HyperToken, Yield Routes, Compound Staker Rewards, USDT, CCIP, Hook and ISM, Protocol v3, Protocol v2, Protocol v1, Sealevel Protocol, Sealevel - Sherlock, CosmWasm Protocol and Starknet Protocol.
Write down 3 things per entry: the heading, the firm, and the host the link points at. The host is what makes step 3 possible, and it varies inside a single page. 11 of Hyperlane's 14 entries are labelled Original on the page and 3 are labelled Mirror. Of the 11 Original entries, 5 point at the firm's own site or repository and 6 point into Hyperlane's own documentation repository.
Step 3: open the report at the firm that signed it
Take the entry that matters to you and open its link. The Protocol v3 Audit entry on Hyperlane's page names Trail of Bits and links a file called 2023-09-hyperlane-securityreview.pdf inside the trailofbits/publications repository. That page loaded on a fetch on 7 November 2026 and renders under the firm's own repository path, so the firm is the one hosting the smart contract audit report rather than the project.
Here is how to check if a crypto project is audited when the project's own documentation goes quiet: search the firm's publications index for the project name, because several of the 9 firms on Hyperlane's page publish their reports themselves. Hyperlane's Protocol v2 entry points at audits.hacken.io and its Protocol v1 entry at fyeo.io, both quoted off Hyperlane's page on 8 November 2026 and neither fetched for this article.
Which audits are named, and where does each report sit?
All 14 entries Hyperlane named on 8 November 2026, in the order its page lists them, with the source label the page itself applies. The host each report link points at is in the firm table below, 1 host per firm.
| Entry | Firm | Label |
|---|---|---|
 Hyperlane Q2 2025 |
ChainLight | Original |
| HyperToken | ChainLight | Original |
| Yield Routes | ChainLight | Original |
| Compound Staker Rewards | Offbeat Security | Original |
| USDT | ChainSecurity | Original |
| CCIP | ChainLight | Original |
| Hook and ISM | ChainLight | Mirror |
| Protocol v3 |  Trail of Bits |
Original |
| Protocol v2 | Hacken | Original |
| Protocol v1 | FYEO | Original |
| Sealevel Protocol | sec3 | Original |
| Sealevel - Sherlock | Sherlock | Mirror |
| CosmWasm Protocol | Oak Security | Original |
| Starknet Protocol | ChainLight | Mirror |
The Protocol v1 entry covers the contracts under the project's earlier name, Abacus, and its link carries august-2022 in the path.
Who audited this crypto project, firm by firm?
The same 14 entries grouped by firm and ranked by the number of entries each one holds, highest first. 9 crypto audit firms hold the 14 entries, and 1 of them holds 6. Opened says whether this article loaded the report at the firm's own host.
| Firm | Entries | Link host | Opened |
|---|---|---|---|
| ChainLight | 6 | Hyperlane docs repo |
Not fetched |
| ChainSecurity | 1 | Hyperlane docs repo |
Not fetched |
| FYEO | 1 | fyeo.io | Not fetched |
| Hacken | 1 | audits.hacken.io | Not fetched |
| Oak Security | 1 | oak-security repo | Not fetched |
| Offbeat Security | 1 | Hyperlane docs repo |
Not fetched |
| sec3 | 1 | sec3 reports repo | Not fetched |
| Sherlock | 1 | Hyperlane docs repo |
Not fetched |
| Trail of Bits |
1 | trailofbits repo | Yes, 7 Nov 2026 |
1 firm of the 9, Trail of Bits, has a NAUT page of its own, filed with an audit service type, with its CEO and a Director named on it. The other 8 were read off Hyperlane's page and were not looked up in NAUT for this article.
What this tells a BD team
- A set audit flag is a reason to call. 293 published NAUT company rows carried it on 7 November 2026, and each one is a team that has already signed a security vendor and knows what the work costs.
- The firm on a project's newest entry is the incumbent. At Hyperlane the newest headings sit with ChainLight, which holds 6 of the 14 entries.
- A project with 14 entries across 9 firms buys audits repeatedly and from more than 1 supplier, so a pitch does not have to displace anyone to win work.
- Name the entry in your first line. "Your Protocol v3 review" is a sentence only someone who read the page can write.
- Filter on the flag293 published company rows on NAUT carried an audit flag on 7 November 2026.
- Read the project's audits pageHyperlane's listed 14 entries across 9 firms on 8 November 2026.
- Spot the incumbentChainLight holds 6 of Hyperlane's 14 entries, so it is the firm to price against.
- Open the team on NAUTThe Hyperlane row names 3 Co-Founders and a core engineering seat.
What this tells a founder raising
- An investor runs step 3, so publish the firm's own link rather than your copy of the PDF. 5 of Hyperlane's 11 Original entries point straight at the firm.
- A heading, a firm and a date answer the diligence question in 1 line. 14 headings on 1 page is why Hyperlane's audit history takes a reader 2 minutes.
- Label a mirror as a mirror. Hyperlane marks 3 of its 14 entries Mirror on its own page, which is cheaper than being asked about it later.
- Keep the earlier name visible. Hyperlane's Protocol v1 report is filed under Abacus, and a reader who does not know that reads a gap in the history.
- Publish 1 audits pageHyperlane keeps all 14 entries in 1 place, with a heading and a link each.
- Link the firm's own copy5 of the 11 Original entries point at the firm's site or repository.
- Mark every mirror3 of the 14 entries say Mirror on the page itself.
- Carry the old nameThe Protocol v1 report is filed under the project's earlier name, Abacus.
How to reach the decision makers
3 people on the Hyperlane row read Co-Founder as of 7 November 2026: Nam Chu Hoai, Asa Oines and Jon Kol. A core engineering row sits beside them, and the live page is where to read the current headcount. On the audit side, the Trail of Bits row names Dan Guido as CEO and Jim Miller as Director, and the firm's own team page confirmed Dan Guido's seat on 8 November 2026 with the line "CEO and co-founder Dan Guido: Our team is the most important investment we make."
Hyperlane raised $18.5M in a seed round announced in September 2022, reported by The Block and by the project's own blog, so the team has been buying security work for 4 years and the audit list above is the paper trail. Each person page says which channels NAUT holds on file for that person. Anyone listed can ask NAUT to remove their page at https://naut.so/legal/data-deletion.
Related reading on NAUT: Crypto security companies: 25 on NAUT, 19 name a founder and How to verify a crypto investor: 6 checks, 143 funds pass 4.
Can you pull this data through the NAUT API?
Yes, for the NAUT half of the 3 steps. GET https://api.naut.so/v1/projects/hyperlane returns the Hyperlane company row with the team NAUT names on it, and GET https://api.naut.so/v1/projects/trail-of-bits returns the audit firm row the same way, while GET https://api.naut.so/v1/services?q=audit searches the service-provider side for audit shops. Each data call is 5 credits against the 3,000 on the $49 Essential plan, every request carries Authorization: Bearer $NAUT_KEY, the parameters are documented at https://naut.so/docs/api and the plans sit at https://naut.so/pricing. Verified Telegram, email and LinkedIn unlock on any paid NAUT plan, so you can start a 7-day trial and open the channels for the team and the audit firm in 1 sitting.
Who audited this crypto project FAQ
Is this crypto project audited, and how would I know?
Open the project's NAUT page and read its audit flag: 293 of NAUT's published company rows carried that flag on 7 November 2026, and a set flag means an audit is on file for that company. The flag names no firm, so the firm comes from the project's own audits page, which for Hyperlane listed 14 entries by 9 firms when it was fetched on 8 November 2026.
Who audited Hyperlane's smart contracts?
9 firms are named across the 14 audit entries on Hyperlane's own audits page as fetched on 8 November 2026: ChainLight with 6 entries, then ChainSecurity, FYEO, Hacken, Oak Security, Offbeat Security, sec3, Sherlock and Trail of Bits with 1 each. The Protocol v3 Audit is the Trail of Bits one, and its report sits in that firm's own publications repository with 2023-09 in the file name.
What does NAUT's audit flag actually tell you?
NAUT's audit flag is a true or false field on a company row, and it was set on 293 published company rows on 7 November 2026. It records that an audit is on file for that company and carries no firm name, no date and no pass mark, which is why step 2 of this check goes to the project's own documentation.
Where can I find Hyperlane's team, its auditor and their contact channels on NAUT?
On their NAUT pages and through 1 API call each: the Hyperlane row names 3 Co-Founders and a core engineering seat, and the Trail of Bits row names Dan Guido and Jim Miller, with GET https://api.naut.so/v1/projects/hyperlane returning the same team data for 5 credits. Verified Telegram, email and LinkedIn unlock on any paid NAUT plan, so you can start a 7-day trial and reach both teams from 1 place.
Sources
- NAUT's own database, read 7 November 2026, read-only: 293 published company rows with an audit flag, the Hyperlane and Trail of Bits rows, and the people named on them.
- Hyperlane's audits documentation page, fetched 7 and 8 November 2026, for the 14 entries, their firms and their Original or Mirror labels: https://docs.hyperlane.xyz/docs/resources/audits
- Trail of Bits publications repository, loaded 7 November 2026, for the September 2023 Hyperlane security review: https://github.com/trailofbits/publications/blob/master/reviews/2023-09-hyperlane-securityreview.pdf
- Trail of Bits team page, read 8 November 2026, for Dan Guido's title: https://www.trailofbits.com/team/
- The Block, 22 September 2022, and Hyperlane's own blog, for the $18.5M seed round: https://www.theblock.co/post/172095/variant-leads-18-5-million-fundraise-for-developer-platform-hyperlane
- Hacken's Hyperlane audit page and FYEO's Hyperlane assessment post, both linked from Hyperlane's audits page and not fetched for this article: https://audits.hacken.io/hyperlane/sca-hyperlane-interchain-message-service-apr2023/ and https://www.fyeo.io/post/fyeo-security-assessment-of-the-hyperlane-formerly-abacus-smart-contracts-in-august-2022