THREAT_MODEL.md

CeloHT Threat Model

Version: 1.0
Project: CeloHT
Security Method: Threat Modeling
Blockchain: Celo

---

1. Purpose

This document identifies the primary threats that may affect CeloHT users, applications, infrastructure, blockchain interactions, smart contracts, agents, treasury operations, and governance systems.

The objective is not to claim that the system is risk-free.

The objective is to identify realistic attack scenarios and establish controls that reduce their probability and impact.

---

2. Assets

The following assets require protection.

2.1 Financial Assets

• CELO

• cUSD

• Treasury funds

• Program funds

• Community funds

2.2 Digital Assets

• Source code

• Smart contracts

• Deployment infrastructure

• Domains

• Application credentials

2.3 User Assets

• Wallet addresses

• Account information

• Educational records

• Application data

2.4 Governance Assets

• Administrative permissions

• Governance credentials

• Treasury authorization

• Proposal systems

2.5 Reputation

CeloHT's credibility with:

• Users

• Communities

• Partners

• Developers

• Donors

• Investors

is also a critical asset.

---

3. Threat Actors

Potential threat actors include:

External attackers

Attempting to compromise public applications or infrastructure.

Phishers

Attempting to steal wallet credentials or trick users into signing malicious transactions.

Malicious users

Attempting to abuse application functionality.

Compromised agents

Agents whose credentials or operational access have been compromised.

Malicious insiders

Authorized individuals abusing legitimate permissions.

Supply-chain attackers

Attempting to compromise dependencies, build systems, or third-party services.

Smart-contract attackers

Attempting to exploit vulnerabilities in deployed contracts.

---

4. Trust Boundaries

User
 │
 ▼
Frontend
 │
 ▼
API
 │
 ▼
Database
User
│
▼
Wallet
│
▼
Celo
Developer
│
▼
GitHub
│
▼
CI/CD
│
▼
Production

Each connection represents a potential security boundary.

---

5. Threat Categories

Major threat categories include:

1. Wallet theft

2. Phishing

3. Unauthorized transactions

4. Smart-contract exploitation

5. API abuse

6. Account takeover

7. Database compromise

8. Secret leakage

9. Supply-chain compromise

10. Insider abuse

11. Treasury compromise

12. Governance manipulation

13. Denial of service

14. Data leakage

15. Infrastructure compromise

---

6. Threat Matrix

Threat	Likelihood	Impact	Priority
Phishing	High	High	Critical
Wallet compromise	Medium	Critical	Critical
Smart-contract exploit	Medium	Critical	Critical
Secret leakage	Medium	Critical	Critical
API abuse	Medium	Medium	High
Account takeover	Medium	High	High
Database breach	Medium	High	High
Supply-chain attack	Low/Medium	High	High
Treasury compromise	Low/Medium	Critical	Critical
Insider abuse	Low/Medium	High	High
DDoS	Medium	Medium	Medium
Data leakage	Medium	High	High

---

26. Incident Severity

Critical

Potential loss of funds, major contract vulnerability, or complete production compromise.

High

Significant user, infrastructure, or data impact.

Medium

Limited security impact requiring remediation.

Low

Minor weakness with limited practical impact.

---

27. Incident Response

Alert
 │
 ▼
Validate
 │
 ▼
Classify Severity
 │
 ▼
Contain
 │
 ▼
Investigate
 │
 ▼
Remediate
 │
 ▼
Recover
 │
 ▼
Document
 │
 ▼
Improve Controls

---

28. Security Assumptions

The architecture assumes:

• The Celo network provides the underlying blockchain security.

• Users are responsible for protecting their wallets.

• Third-party infrastructure may fail.

• External dependencies may contain vulnerabilities.

• Human error is possible.

• No single security control is sufficient.

---

29. Security Objectives

CeloHT security should preserve:

Confidentiality

Protect sensitive application information.

Integrity

Prevent unauthorized modification.

Availability

Keep critical services operational.

Authenticity

Ensure users interact with legitimate systems.

Accountability

Maintain sufficient records to investigate important actions.

---

30. Final Risk Position

CeloHT should not represent itself as "risk-free" or "fully secure."

Security is an ongoing process.

The objective is to:

• Identify risks

• Reduce attack surfaces

• Protect users

• Protect funds

• Protect infrastructure

• Detect attacks

• Respond quickly

• Learn from incidents

---

Status

Document: Threat Model
Version: 1.0
Project: CeloHT
Method: Risk-based threat modeling
Review Frequency: After major architectural or security changes