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.

Lista Liquid Staking

Lista Liquid Staking official site N/A

Binance

:

  • 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: measured against 2 comparable incidents/controls in this protocol's TVL, age and category bucket.

Published 2026-10-10, unchanged since. Subscribers are told the day it changes.

Why this rating
Audit profile10.0
4 audits on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 3 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 surface5.0
Governance concentration/quorum data unknown.
Dependency risk4.5
No bridge or oracle dependencies on record, composable with 2 other protocols. ListaStakeManager.sol (github.com/lista-dao/synclub-contracts, read in full) has no price-oracle dependency: convertBnbToSnBnb()/convertSnBnbToBnb() compute the mint/burn exchange rate directly from getTotalPooledBnb() (BNB delegated to validators via BNB Chain's native StakeHub/StakeCredit precompiles, read through IStakeHub/IStakeCredit) divided by totalShares - internal liquid-staking accounting, not an external price feed.
Show the evidenceNo bridge dependency: the contract imports no bridge/messaging interface and BlockSec's and PeckShield's 2024 audits, both scoped to this file alone, describe no cross-chain component in the core deposit/withdraw/delegate/compound logic.
TVL profile3.5
TVL change (2%) is within a stable range.
Code characteristics3.0
Admin key: 24h timelock in place, open source.
Team factors3.0
Anonymous team, a weak but real signal on its own.
Historical incidents2.3
No known own or inherited incidents as of 10 October 2026.
Protocol age1.5
1160 days live, past the ~1yr floor; treated the same as any older protocol, not scored progressively safer with more age.
Bug bounty0.7
Has a bug bounty program, up to $1 000 000, hosted on Immunefi.
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 Lista Liquid Staking

Foreshock's independent reading of Lista Liquid Staking is Moderate risk, 33.5 out of 100, as of 10 October 2026. The largest single contributor to that reading is audit profile: 4 audits on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 3 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. 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 Lista Liquid Staking safe?
Foreshock does not answer that as a yes or a no. Its independent reading of Lista Liquid Staking is Moderate risk, 33.5 out of 100, as of 10 October 2026, led by audit profile: 4 audits on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 3 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. The score and the reasoning are published in full so the reading can be checked rather than trusted.
Has Lista Liquid Staking been audited?
4 audits on record, most recent audit is over 2 years old; the most recent audit found 0 High and 3 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 Lista Liquid Staking?
Admin key: 24h timelock in place, open source. Governance concentration/quorum data unknown.
Has Lista Liquid Staking been exploited before?
No known own or inherited incidents as of 10 October 2026. Foreshock records an incident against a protocol whether it originated there or was inherited from something it depends on.
When was this Lista Liquid Staking assessment last updated?
10 October 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 Binance

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 Lista Liquid Staking 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