Post-Incident Review

3 min read

Pronunciation

[poʊst-ˈɪn-sɪ-dənt rɪ-ˈvyuː]

Analogy

Think of a post-incident review as the equivalent of an aircraft crash investigation. Just as aviation authorities meticulously analyze black box data, interview witnesses, examine wreckage, and reconstruct the sequence of events after an airplane accident—not to assign blame but to prevent similar tragedies in the future—blockchain teams conduct comprehensive investigations after security breaches or technical failures. The process requires the same methodical approach: collecting all available data, establishing a precise timeline, identifying both technical and human factors that contributed to the incident, and ultimately sharing the findings with the broader community. The goal in both cases is to transform a negative event into a learning opportunity that makes the entire ecosystem safer by ensuring the same vulnerability doesn't cause repeated incidents across different projects.

Definition

A structured analysis process conducted after a security breach, exploit, or technical failure in systems to identify root causes, document the incident timeline, and implement preventative measures. -incident reviews provide to users while helping protocols strengthen security posture, improve response procedures, and prevent similar vulnerabilities from affecting operations in the future.

Key Points Intro

-incident reviews implement several key functions for security improvement.

Key Points

Root cause analysis: Identifies fundamental vulnerabilities or procedural failures that enabled the incident rather than just addressing symptoms.

Transparent communication: Provides comprehensive disclosure to affected users and the broader community about incident details and remediation efforts.

Operational improvement: Develops specific protocol changes, code updates, and process modifications to prevent similar incidents in the future.

Industry knowledge sharing: Contributes incident details to communal security resources that help other projects prevent similar vulnerabilities.

Example

lending SecureLend experiences a $4.2 million exploit when an attacker manipulates their price feed to create artificially inflated collateral values. After immediate incident response measures contain the damage, their security team launches a comprehensive post-incident review. They reconstruct the attack vector by analyzing transactions, collecting data feeds, reviewing code commits, and interviewing team members who responded to alerts. The investigation reveals that while their primary implementation was secure, a fallback mechanism designed to handle temporary data unavailability lacked proper validation checks before accepting price inputs. The review documents how this vulnerability, introduced three months earlier during a routine upgrade, passed code review because test coverage didn't include the specific edge case the attacker exploited. Beyond technical findings, the review identifies organizational factors including insufficient security resources allocated to secondary systems and gaps in the code review process. SecureLend publishes a detailed public report including the full attack timeline, vulnerable code snippets, lessons learned, and specific remediations—including implementing circuit breakers for suspicious price movements, enhancing redundancy with majority voting, and revising their security review procedures. This helps users understand the incident while providing valuable insights that several other protocols use to audit their own implementations, preventing potential copycat attacks across the ecosystem.

Technical Deep Dive

Comprehensive -incident reviews for systems implement structured methodologies adapted to decentralized architectures and transparent environments. Technical investigation typically begins with reconstructing attack sequences through monitoring data, explorers, and internal logs, often using specialized forensic tools that decode complex contract interactions and trace value flows across multiple protocols. Root cause identification employs both automated methods including fuzzing against identified vectors and to discover related vulnerabilities, combined with manual code review focusing on components implicated by the incident. Timeline reconstruction synthesizes multiple data sources with timestamps serving as the authoritative sequence reference, correlated with events including actions, updates, and monitoring alerts. Technical depth typically includes disassembled analysis for vulnerabilities, JavaScript/frontend review for user interface compromises, and infrastructure examination covering , access controls, and procedures. For organizational assessment, the blameless postmortem approach emphasizes systemic improvements over individual responsibility, using techniques like Five Whys or Ishikawa diagrams to identify deeper organizational factors contributing to technical failures. Documentation follows standardized formats including executive summary for non-technical stakeholders, detailed technical breakdown for security professionals, timelines visualized with tools like Gantt charts showing parallel activity streams, and remediation tracking using SMART criteria (Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, Time-bound) for each recommended action. Advanced implementations include tabletop simulations testing whether proposed changes would have prevented the original incident and formal verification of critical replacement components.

Security Warning

While is valuable, -incident reviews must balance disclosure with security considerations. Avoid publishing exploit details that could enable copycat attacks against other vulnerable systems before sufficient time has passed for affected protocols to implement patches.

Caveat

Despite their value, -incident reviews face several significant challenges in environments including establishing complete information when attackers use privacy-preserving techniques or cross-chain interactions that obscure flows. The public and immutable nature of blockchains creates disclosure dilemmas where detailed technical explanations might enable copycat attacks against similar protocols. Remediation implementation often faces governance challenges in decentralized protocols where security improvements may require votes or coordination across multiple stakeholders with divergent interests. Additionally, the competitive nature of the industry sometimes discourages full about security failures due to concerns about user confidence and market perception, potentially limiting the ecosystem-wide learning that comprehensive reviews would enable.

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency Glossary

Post-Incident Review - Related Articles