Bridge rate-limiter / chain-pause as positive mitigant
Liquity V1 + V2 (LUSD / BOLD)'s assessment for RD-F-185 — scored not_applicable on the v1.7.0 rubric. The evidence below is the curator's reasoning for this score.
Evidence summary #
Liquity is an Ethereum-native non-bridge protocol. F185 (bridge rate-limiter / chain-pause as positive mitigant) is structurally not applicable — there are no cross-chain routes to rate-limit and no bridge chain-pause capability is needed. The positive-mitigant spirit of F185 (protection against large outflow events) is served in Liquity's case by the absence of admin keys (no admin can be compromised to execute a rapid drain) rather than by a rate-limiter.
Sources #
- InternalLiquity Protocol Profile Meta.research/protocols/liquity/00-profile.meta.json — has_bridge_surface: false; is_a_bridge: falseretrieved 2026-05-16
Methodology #
Determine whether the bridge implements a per-window outflow rate-limiter (and at what cap), and whether the protocol team can trigger a chain-level or validator-set emergency pause.
See the full factor methodology and distribution across all protocols →