Use case · Critical libraries

High-signal correctness bugs in libraries everyone depends on.

Proof finds reproducible correctness and security issues in major libraries, then turns confirmed findings into regression evidence maintainers and downstream users can act on.

Reproducer · Severity rationale · Patch verification
Audit goalConfirmed only
Input

High-impact library, release window, or fragile subsystem.

Output

Confirmed finding, reproducer, severity rationale, regression path, disclosure status.

Value

A single confirmed issue becomes the starting point for continuous coverage of the class.

Buyer pain

A small library bug can become a platform problem.

Maintainers

Need precise reports that respect disclosure and reduce triage burden.

Security teams

Need high-confidence findings, not speculative scanner output.

Infrastructure users

Need to understand whether a dependency bug affects their production path.

Proof points

Every claim should be backed by something rerunnable.

  • Minimal reproducer or deterministic test where feasible.
  • Severity rationale tied to affected surface and blast radius.
  • Patch verification when a fix is available.
  • Disclosure-safe writeup after maintainer/customer approval.
  • Path from one finding into continuous coverage of the class.

Starting point

Bring one dependency or fragile subsystem.

  • Focus on libraries with broad downstream impact.
  • Confirm behavior with a minimized reproducer or deterministic test where feasible.
  • Map severity to affected surface, exploitability, and blast radius.
  • Verify patches and adjacent regression risk after a fix lands.

Do not submit secrets or private source code here. See Trust.