★ Bridge ecrecover checks result ≠ address(0)
Convex Finance's assessment for RD-F-151 — scored not_applicable on the v1.7.0 rubric. The evidence below is the curator's reasoning for this score.
Evidence summary #
[★ CRITICAL] Not applicable — Convex has no bridge; no ecrecover signature verification path exists in any Convex contract. The Wormhole-class ecrecover zero-address check is not applicable to a protocol with no cross-chain message signing.
Sources #
- GitHubConvex Finance Sidechain Platform — Interfacesgithub.com/convex-eth/sidechain-platform: interfaces directory contains no bridge interface, no signature verification, no ecrecover pattern in any contractretrieved 2026-05-16
- Convex Finance Protocol Profile §7.research/protocols/convex-finance/00-profile.md §7: is_a_bridge: false, has_bridge_surface: false; sidechain deployments are independent per-chain Boosters with no Convex-operated bridgeretrieved 2026-05-16
Methodology #
Determine whether the bridge verifier code rejects `ecrecover` returns of `address(0)`.
See the full factor methodology and distribution across all protocols →
rubric_version v1.7.0 protocol convex-finance factor RD-F-151 score not_applicable collected_at 2026-05-16 02:41:28