Papers › Demystifying and Detecting Cryptographic Defects in Ethereum Smart Contracts
Demystifying and Detecting Cryptographic Defects in Ethereum Smart Contracts
Jiashuo Zhang, Yiming Shen, Jiachi Chen, Jianzhong Su, Yanlin Wang, Ting Chen, Jianbo Gao, Zhong Chen
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Ethereum has officially provided a set of system-level cryptographic APIs to enhance smart contracts with cryptographic capabilities. These APIs have been utilized in over 10% of Ethereum transactions, motivating developers to implement various on-chain cryptographic tasks, such as digital signatures. However, since developers may not always be cryptographic experts, their ad-hoc and potentially defective implementations could compromise the theoretical guarantees of cryptography, leading to real-world security issues. To mitigate this threat, we conducted the first study aimed at demystifying and detecting cryptographic defects in smart contracts. Through the analysis of 2,406 real-world security reports, we defined nine types of cryptographic defects in smart contracts with detailed descriptions and practical detection patterns. Based on this categorization, we proposed CrySol, a fuzzing-based tool to automate the detection of cryptographic defects in smart contracts. It combines transaction replaying and dynamic taint analysis to extract fine-grained crypto-related semantics and employs crypto-specific strategies to guide the test case generation process. Furthermore, we collected a large-scale dataset containing 25,745 real-world crypto-related smart contracts and evaluated CrySol's effectiveness on it. The result demonstrated that CrySol achieves an overall precision of 95.4% and a recall of 91.2%. Notably, CrySol revealed that 5,847 (22.7%) out of 25,745 smart contracts contain at least one cryptographic defect, highlighting the prevalence of these defects.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections