How Can We Close the Security Tooling Gap for Canton & DAML? We’re Building Grisoco AI
DAML has a very different security model from Solidity — but it doesn’t yet have the same mature ecosystem of automated security-analysis tools.
For EVM contracts, developers can turn to tools like Slither, Mythril, Echidna and others to examine code from multiple security angles.
For DAML, many of the risks are fundamentally different.
Authorization can be wired to the wrong party. Privacy boundaries can expose information to unintended participants. Contract design can create contention under real usage. An upgrade can introduce problems for contracts already live on the ledger.
These aren’t simply Solidity vulnerabilities with different names — they require a DAML-native approach.
That is the problem we’re trying to address with Grisoco AI.
We’ve built a dedicated DAML/Canton security review pipeline focused on:
• Authorization
• Privacy
• Contention
• Upgrade compatibility
Multiple independent AI security lenses review the package, followed by a jury and challenge process rather than relying on a single model’s opinion.
For authorization findings, Grisoco can also replay the scenario against a disposable Canton ledger, providing execution evidence alongside the analysis.
But we don’t want to decide in isolation what DAML security tooling should look like.
Grisoco is in beta, and we’re actively looking for input from people building on Canton.
Try it. Challenge the findings. Tell us what it misses.
If there’s a security check, workflow, AI model, integration, or other capability you wish existed for DAML, tell us — we’re open to expanding Grisoco based on real ecosystem needs.
If you could add one security capability to the DAML ecosystem today, what would it be?