This work refers to vulnerabilities that violate the security guarantees of cross-chain verification as Cross-chain Verification Vulnerabilities (CVVs), and conducts the first systematic empirical study of this vulnerability class.
Abstract
With the rapid development of blockchain technology, numerous heterogeneous blockchains have emerged, each featuring distinct architectures, consensus mechanisms, and application ecosystems. Cross-chain bridges have consequently become a critical infrastructure component, typically relying on smart contracts to facilitate message passing and asset transfers across heterogeneous blockchains. Unlike single-chain contracts, bridge contracts introduce additional verification logic to validate external-chain data, such as state proofs, message sender identities, and signatures. However, correctly implementing such logic is challenging. We refer to vulnerabilities that violate the security guarantees of cross-chain verification as Cross-chain Verification Vulnerabilities (CVVs). To characterize CVVs, we conduct the first systematic empirical study of this vulnerability class. By analyzing 588 security audit reports from 36 real-world cross-chain bridge projects, we derive 11 CVV patterns and organize them into 5 high-level categories according to the affected verification properties. Following this taxonomy, we construct a CVV dataset containing 830 vulnerability instances across 786 contract files. The dataset establishes mappings among audit reports, audited source-code versions, affected source files, and CVV-pattern labels. We then assess existing detection approaches. Current tools provide limited documented coverage of CVV patterns, while only two of four evaluated LLMs outperform an all-pattern constant baseline of 29.3% Macro-F1; the best reaches 51.2%. Together, the limited tool coverage and inconsistent LLM gains motivate detection methods tailored to cross-chain verification semantics.
Blockchain networks rely on different forms of governance, consensus, data, and execution, which makes it difficult to achieve secure cross-chain data exchange. Existing interoperability approaches often rely on intermediaries, protocol-specific mechanisms, or limited validation, leaving gaps in trust minimization, dat...
Suchitra Morwadkar, Anagha Kulkarni, Sanika Kulkarni· International Research Journ...· 0 citations
Blockchain introduced secure, peer‐to‐peer transactions in decentralized environments without reliance on central authorities. However, attackers continue to exploit blockchain projects. Over the past decade, reported blockchain exploit losses have exceeded $24 billion. Although existing research analyzes blockchai...
Abdur Rehman Raza, Shahzaib Tahir, M. Bilal et al.· Security and Privacy· 0 citations
Blockchain systems face critical security vulnerabilities across all architectural layers, with over $1.8 billion stolen in 2023 alone. This systematic review analyzes 140 peer-reviewed studies (2018–2025) to provide a comprehensive taxonomy of blockchain vulnerabilities, detection methods, and mitigation strategies. W...
Smart contracts, characterized by automation, transparency, and decentralization, can establish efficient, secure, and reliable blockchain fund management and data processing mechanisms, playing a crucial supporting role in blockchain application scenarios. However, security issues in smart contracts are increasingly p...
Gong-Ming Wang, Jun-Song Zhou, Bing-Sen Li et al.· Information· 0 citations
Blockchains enable decentralized applications through smart contracts---interactive programs executed through consensus. However, the inherently asynchronous nature of blockchain transaction ordering introduces a class of vulnerabilities known as frontrunning attacks, which have caused millions of dollars in losses in...
Sebastian Holler, Anna Piscitelli, Jannik Albrecht et al.· 0 citations
Cross-chain bridges are critical for asset mobility across fragmented blockchain ecosystems and the backbone of multi-chain DeFi. However, cross-chain transaction asynchrony introduces an underexplored risk: transaction stalling. Unlike active threats (e.g., security breaches), stalled transactions trap user funds, und...
Wen-Long Zhang, Ya-Jin Zhou, Lei Wu· Proceedings of the 2026 ACM...· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.