Just shipped on Immunefi: Priority Mediation. For a while now, security researchers have been telling us the same thing: when you've put real work into a report and you believe in it, waiting weeks for a mediator to pick it up is brutal. Priority Mediation now lets researchers who are confident in their submission pay to get faster resolution with a hard commitment: resolution within 30 business days, mediator status updates at least every 7 business days along the way. A couple things I want to be explicit about, because they matter: 1) Free mediation requests are reviewed by the same trained mediators, using the exact same decision framework. 2) The tier you choose affects the queue, not the verdict. A paid mediation does not buy you a favorable outcome. It buys you speed and additional hands-on activity. Every case gets the same impartial review, full stop. If we ever blurred that line, the whole system would be worthless. This is one of several changes we're shipping based on direct researcher feedback. Keep it coming so we can usher in SR Summer.

Big news from Immunefi: we just shipped Proof of Duplicate, and it's *the* feature I've been wanting to see for a long time. For years, one of the most frustrating experiences a whitehat could have was submitting a report, putting in the hours of research, the careful write-up, the working PoC… and getting back a one-line "duplicate, closing." No justification and no transparency. No way to push back. That era is over. Starting now, when a submission is closed as a duplicate, it points to the original report. The researcher can read the original. They can compare the reports for themselves... and if they believe the call was wrong, they get a formal dispute button. Verdict upheld means the report stays closed. If the verdict is overturned, the report gets reopened and goes back through triage like nothing happened, including reward eligibility. This matters beyond the feature itself. The whitehat community is the immune system of crypto. Every protocol secured, every exploit prevented, every billion in TVL that didn't get drained. For this immune system to keep working, things have to keep improving for whitehats. Proof of Duplicate is just one piece. There will be more. SR Summer 2026 is coming.

Real talk: we should have shipped this earlier. Starting now, duplicate submissions on Immunefi will no longer count against a security researcher's standing on our platform. If your report happens to be a dupe, it won't be held against you in the automated restriction system. Period. Dupes are a normal part of bug bounty work. Two researchers can independently find the same issue within hours of each other. Penalizing the second submitter discourages exactly the people we need most: the ones hunting hard, moving fast, and reporting in good faith. The researcher experience on Immunefi is the single most important lever we have for keeping crypto safe and secure. Every friction point we leave in place is a tax on the people protecting billions in user funds. We owe them better, and we're going to keep tightening this until the platform feels like it was built by researchers, for researchers. A whole lot more changes in this direction coming. Keep the feedback coming. SR Summer is coming on Immunefi.

The Future of On-Chain Security Is Human. Crypto security platforms are abandoning security researchers for AI. A lot of the platforms that built their name on security researchers are pivoting hard into AI. It is an understandable move. AI auditing is a real opportunity, the teams pursuing it are serious, and proprietary tooling has a clear commercial story. We are not against AI. It will play a meaningful role in the future of this industry. But the shift has come at a cost. Contests are smaller. Communication is thinner. Researchers who spent years building reputations on these platforms have been deprioritized as the roadmaps point elsewhere. We are making a different bet. Independent security researchers have prevented billions of dollars in losses across crypto. Every major class of vulnerability we now consider "standard knowledge" was first surfaced by a person. The frontier has always been pushed by humans working in the open. That is not an argument against AI. It is an argument about what AI cannot do alone. In fact, the best researchers are already using AI as leverage. Since AI tooling became more accessible, we have seen a clear rise in both the volume and quality of serious submissions. Yes, spam has increased too. But over the past two years, we have seen serious hunters submit stronger work, earn larger payouts, and outperform their own pre-AI baselines. We have seen new researchers appear almost overnight and climb to the top of leaderboards by using AI to move through codebases faster, ask better questions, and hunt at a scale that was not possible before. And we have seen already-elite researchers become even more dangerous with it. @Riptide was exceptional before AI. With AI as leverage through @therealgregoAI, he is operating at another level. Researchers find what nobody has seen yet. The two are complementary, but only one of them scales adversarial creativity. We think crowdsourced security is still the strongest security foundation crypto has. AI isn’t diminishing crowdsourced security; it’s making it even stronger, more effective, more critical. Bug bounties. Audit competitions. Shared knowledge. Researchers compensated fairly for the value they create. That is the bet we have always made. That is the bet we are doubling down on now. We are scaling crowdsourced security in ways this industry has not seen before. The protocols that will survive the next decade are the ones being tested by thousands of adversarial minds in the open. Supercharged by AI, absolutely, but non-negotiably human at their core. If you are a security researcher and the past year has felt different, you are not imagining it. Come build with us. We are going somewhere new, and we want you with us when we get there.