FORESHOCK

Protocols

Request coverage

Every protocol here carries a dated score and the share of it backed by independently verified evidence. Where that share is still thin the assessment says so, is marked Low-signal rather than given a risk band, and holds every unevidenced category at the neutral midpoint instead of assuming it safe. Every score and its reasoning are free to read; the underlying dependency, incident and audit records are part of a plan. Each reading here is fixed at the date beside it. Re-scoring never stops, but a changed reading reaches plan holders on the day it changes rather than this page, which is what a plan is for. How a score is built, how to read one, and how the rubric was tested against real exploits are all in the methodology.

Coverage grows three ways: protocols Foreshock selects at its own discretion, protocols requested through the Request coverage button, and sponsored assessments delivered on an agreed timeline. No path has a guaranteed date except sponsorship.

Scores run from 0, the safest reading, to 100, the riskiest, where 50 is the neutral midpoint every unverified category is held at. Red marks a protocol scoring 50 or above, the band called Elevated: worse than neutral on the evidence gathered. Amber marks one below it, called Moderate. The boundary is fixed. It does not move as coverage grows, and it is not fitted to any backtest result.

Ethena USDtb

Ethena USDtb official site N/A

Ethereum

:

  • Evidence: this reading is based on 100% of the scored weight, verified against named sources. Categories without verified data are held at the neutral midpoint at their full weight, never counted as safe.
  • Validation: the rubric is backtested against past exploits of protocols in the same TVL, age and category bucket. Protocols of this scale and kind have no such history - a limit of the record itself, not unfinished work.

Published 2026-09-25. Up-to-date reading and 2 changes since for subscribers. See plans

Why this rating
Code characteristics14.3
Admin key: eoa (a single key), upgradeable without a meaningful timelock, open source.
Audit profile7.0
4 audits on record, most recent audit is 1-2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 2 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today.
Governance attack surface7.0
No governance token; control sits with eoa rather than a vote, so decision rights are concentrated rather than capturable. The form of that key is scored separately under code characteristics.
Dependency risk6.0
No bridge or oracle dependencies on record, composable with 4 other protocols. USDtb consumes NO external on-chain price oracle, and that is a first-party-evidenced fact rather than an absence of documentation.
Show the evidenceEthena's own contest repo states that 'The price present in any mint/redeem orders are determined by an off-chain RFQ system controlled by Ethena', with an on-chain sanity band applied through verifyStablesLimit depending on whether a collateral is typed STABLE or ASSET. So the price risk is operator risk, not oracle risk. Backing is two assets and USDtb says so plainly: BUIDL and USD, with Anchorage named as holder against both. Since 2025-10-13 issuance, redemption and reserve management sit with Anchorage Digital Bank, and only Anchorage customers can mint or redeem. Attestations are published by Anchorage and linked from USDtb's transparency page, which carries its own disclaimer that the transparency reporting is 'unofficial, not maintained by Anchorage Digital, and not reflective of Anchorage Digital's position on the collateralization of USDtb'. Attestation FREQUENCY is not stated: the homepage claims monthly attestations but the transparency page's Last Updated field renders as a dash. No bridge dependency is recorded even though USDtb exists on Solana and Anchorage custody addresses exist on five chains, because no USDtb document describes any bridge or cross-chain mechanism. That is a documented silence, not an assertion of independence.
TVL profile3.5
TVL change (-2%) is within a stable range.
Bug bounty3.3
No bug bounty program on record.
Team factors3.0
Anonymous team, a weak but real signal on its own.
Historical incidents2.2
No known own or inherited incidents as of 25 September 2026.
Protocol age1.5
648 days live, past the ~1yr floor; treated the same as any older protocol, not scored progressively safer with more age.
Assets held (1)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Dependencies (2)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Incident history (0)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Audit history (4)

Available with a plan. See pricing.

Common questions about Ethena USDtb

Foreshock's independent reading of Ethena USDtb is Moderate risk, 47.8 out of 100, as of 25 September 2026. The largest single contributor to that reading is code characteristics: admin key: eoa (a single key), upgradeable without a meaningful timelock, open source. All nine scored categories are backed by verified evidence. This published reading is fixed at that date. Re-scoring never stops, and when a reading changes it reaches plan holders on the day it changes rather than this page. Foreshock publishes the reading and the reasoning behind it. It is not a verdict on whether to use this protocol, and it is not investment advice.

Is Ethena USDtb safe?
Foreshock does not answer that as a yes or a no. Its independent reading of Ethena USDtb is Moderate risk, 47.8 out of 100, as of 25 September 2026, led by code characteristics: admin key: eoa (a single key), upgradeable without a meaningful timelock, open source. The score and the reasoning are published in full so the reading can be checked rather than trusted.
Has Ethena USDtb been audited?
4 audits on record, most recent audit is 1-2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 2 Medium severity issues. This reflects code quality at the time of that audit only, not a claim that these specific issues are still unresolved today. An audit describes the code at the time it was reviewed. It is not a statement that the protocol is safe today.
Who controls Ethena USDtb?
Admin key: eoa (a single key), upgradeable without a meaningful timelock, open source. No governance token; control sits with eoa rather than a vote, so decision rights are concentrated rather than capturable. The form of that key is scored separately under code characteristics.
Has Ethena USDtb been exploited before?
No known own or inherited incidents as of 25 September 2026. Foreshock records an incident against a protocol whether it originated there or was inherited from something it depends on.
When was this Ethena USDtb assessment last updated?
25 September 2026, and that date does not move on its own. A reading published here is fixed when it is published; re-scoring never stops, and a changed reading reaches plan holders on the day it changes rather than this page. Every category carries the date of the evidence behind it.
Also covered on Ethereum

This assessment follows Foreshock's published methodology. Exact category weights, scoring rules, thresholds, and aggregation logic are proprietary and not shown here. How to interpret this assessment

This reading will change.

This reading is fixed at the date above it, and it stays there. We keep re-scoring Ethena USDtb as the evidence moves, a new audit, a changed admin control, an incident, and this page is free to read and always will be. The updated reading is what a plan buys: you are told by email on the day it changes, instead of finding out the next time you happen to look.

Pick one protocol and get a free weekly summary of what changed. Same-day alerts come with a plan.

Monitor this protocolGet told when this changesBrowse every protocol