➤ ./webnuvexa --vertical web3
Resolving chain clients...
Indexing contract events...
✓ Reorg-aware confirmation handling
✓ Contract suite green
✓ Audit package assembled
! No audit report issued by us
Awaiting qualified auditor▒
// Industries / Web3, Crypto & Blockchain
Protocol teams need the layer around the contract.
Indexers that survive a reorg. Frontends where a user can see what they are signing. Off-chain services that hold no keys. Test suites an auditor can actually run. Built for teams who have a contract and need the engineering around it to hold up.
The Problems We Actually Get Called About
Crypto engineering problems are rarely about the contract. They are about everything that has to agree with it.
The Contract Is Not The Product
Users interact with a wallet prompt, a signature request and a pending state. That surface carries more failure modes than the contract, and it is the part most budgets forget to fund.
Several Chains, One Product
Reading from an L1 and two L2s means three clients, three confirmation models and three sets of fee semantics. Untreated, this becomes code paths that quietly disagree with each other.
Chain Data Is Not Queryable
Reading state directly gives you no history and does not scale. Teams need events indexed into rows, backfilled safely, with a model that survives a reorganisation without double-counting.
Finality Is Assumed, Not Handled
On chains with probabilistic finality, a succeeded transaction can be un-succeeded. Balance displays, rewards and accounting written without that assumption produce wrong numbers that look right.
The Audit Is Underprepared
Audit firms bill for getting up to speed. A documented system, a running test suite and a written threat model are what turn a two-round audit into a single round, and they are cheap compared to the extra round.
Signature Requests Nobody Reads
A user who does not know what they are approving cannot consent to it. Unbounded approvals and opaque payloads turn a normal dApp interaction into an avoidable loss.
What We Build Here
The indexer and the signing surface are the load-bearing parts. Everything else is arranged around them.
BUILD: Chain Infrastructure
Event indexers with backfill and reorg handling, off-chain services and backend-for-frontend layers, typed clients behind one adapter, and contract test suites with fuzz and invariant coverage.
DESIGN: Signing Clarity
Wallet connection and network switching, transaction lifecycle states, approval screens that state exactly what is being signed, and failure states a non-technical user can act on.
GROW: Developer Adoption
Documentation and integration guides, runnable example repositories, protocol explainers, and search visibility for the questions developers ask before they integrate.
Constraints And Where We Stop
Crypto buyers often arrive expecting something we deliberately do not sell. Saying so up front is cheaper than discovering it in month two.
We Do Not Audit Smart Contracts
WebNuvexa performs no smart contract security audit, publishes no audit report, and issues no security attestation or certification of any kind. Contract auditing is a regulated professional service performed by qualified firms carrying their own liability. We build the evidence and prepare the package; a qualified third party issues the finding.
We Never Hold A Production Key
No WebNuvexa employee, contractor or system holds a private key, seed phrase or treasury wallet. Signing is integrated with the signer, KMS or HSM you operate, and key custody is your responsibility, permanently.
No Tokenomics Or Launch Design
We do not design token economics, write whitepapers or advise on emission schedules and distribution. That work belongs with a protocol economist and a technical writer.
No Trading Or Market Infrastructure
We do not build trading bots, arbitrage, market making, MEV searchers or execution strategies. Nothing we ship should depend on execution research we have not performed.
No Regulatory Or Licensing Advice
Whether a token or product is a security, a commodity or an investment contract is a legal determination made with qualified counsel and, where relevant, a regulator. Nothing on this page is legal or regulatory advice.
Technical Decisions That Matter Here
The choices that determine whether a protocol integration is still correct in a year.
One Adapter, Many Chains
Chain-specific clients are confined behind a single interface. Product code never branches on which chain it is talking to, which is what makes adding a fourth chain a days-long change rather than a quarter.
Reorg-Aware Indexing
Indexing is written against confirmation depth rather than block height, with a rollback path for orphaned blocks. A naive indexer that double-counts after a reorg produces financial errors that surface weeks later.
Deduplication By Identity
Every indexed row carries a deterministic identity derived from chain, transaction, log index and block. Re-processing a range is therefore idempotent, which makes backfills safe to re-run.
Signing Stays With Your Signer
The application proposes transactions; your infrastructure signs them. No long-lived signing key exists in application scope, so a compromised web server does not become a compromised treasury.
Reverts Are Tested, Not Assumed
Test suites assert that the intended calls revert when they should. In practice this is where the bugs live, and it is the part most teams leave to the auditor to find.
Chain Upgrades Are Tracked
Hard forks, EIPs, client releases and SDK deprecations are tracked as scheduled maintenance. A protocol integration that quietly stops working after a client release is a support incident you already paid for.
Chains We Build Against
Stated as capability, with the reasoning attached. Ask us directly which of these we have shipped on.
| Chain family | Typical use in a product we build | What differs in the engineering |
|---|---|---|
| Ethereum | Settlement layer, token contracts, high-value state | Gas accounting, calldata cost and RPC rate limits dominate. Indexing has to be economical over long ranges. |
| Ethereum L2s (Arbitrum, Optimism, Base) | Lower-cost execution with Ethereum settlement | Sequencer dependency and delayed finality change what "confirmed" means. Withdrawal and message-passing flows need explicit handling. |
| Solana | High-throughput consumer applications | Account model instead of global state, instruction-based calls, account rent, and blockhash plus slot commitment rather than block confirmation. |
| Polygon PoS / CDK | EVM-compatible throughput | Close to Ethereum in model; the differences are withdrawal semantics and chain-specific precompiles. |
| Starknet (Cairo) | ZK-proven contracts and applications | Cairo contracts verified separately, plus a prover and sequencer dependency to reason about. |
| Bitcoin (Ordinals, inscriptions, Lightning) | Asset and payment rails, not general compute | UTXO model, script or Taproot constraints, and no smart-contract execution environment comparable to the EVM. |
| Aptos / Sui / Cosmos (CosmWasm) | Move- or Wasm-based chains | Object model and different address schemes. A different codebase, not a config flag. |
This table describes where we can build competently. It is not a claim that we have shipped a production system on every row. We will tell you our actual experience on your chain before you commit.
Mapped To Real Services
Every capability below is an existing WebNuvexa service page.
➤ Web3 & Blockchain — Chain integration, indexers, dApp frontends and audit-prep engineering.
➤ Custom Software — Protocol-adjacent services, back offices and internal tooling.
➤ API Development — Public and partner APIs with versioning, rate limits and documented contracts.
➤ SaaS Development — Multi-tenant products where each workspace has its own data boundary.
➤ Web Development — Marketing sites, dashboards and documentation portals.
➤ DevOps & Cloud — Environments, key management integration, monitoring and rollback.
➤ AI Development — On-chain data analysis, risk scoring and anomaly detection with evaluation.
➤ Legacy Modernization — Migrating systems built on retired chains or abandoned SDK versions.
➤ UI/UX Design — Wallet flows, signing clarity and transaction states users can act on.
➤ Design Systems — Shared primitives for token, balance and transaction surfaces.
➤ Technical SEO — Documentation and protocol content discoverable by developers.
➤ Content Marketing — Protocol explainers and educational content, reviewed for accuracy.
➤ Fractional CTO — Architecture direction and protocol engineering review.
➤ Dedicated Teams — A named pod scoped as a fixed monthly commitment.
➤ Maintenance & Support — Dependency currency, chain upgrade tracking and incident response.
Indicative Engagement Shapes
Illustrative fixed-fee phase structures only. Regulated scopes are quoted after a compliance and architecture conversation, not from a form.
Scope And Threat Model
Chains, contracts, key custody boundaries, and what a user can be induced to sign. Output is a written scope boundary and a threat model, drafted to be handed to an external auditor unchanged.
Integration Build
Typed clients behind one adapter, wallet and signing flows, off-chain services, and the indexer with backfill and reorg handling. Built against a local chain first so the feedback loop stays fast.
Testing And Hardening
Contract and integration suites, fuzzing and static analysis on our side, reorg and failure-path testing, and remediation. Priced separately because the findings determine the effort honestly.
Audit Readiness And Handover
Documentation package, deployment address registry, running test suite, known intended-calls list and handover notes, so your chosen audit firm bills for analysis rather than for orientation.
Chain Maintenance And Support
A separately priced retainer for chain upgrade tracking, dependency currency, client and SDK releases, and incident response.
Who This Is Not For
The Web3 version of an honest no.
You Need An Audit Certificate
If the deliverable you are buying is a security attestation, we are the wrong supplier regardless of price. That document has to come from a qualified audit firm, and we will help you prepare for one instead.
You Want To Launch Faster Than You Can Specify
A protocol without a written specification, a stated threat model and named key custody boundaries is not ready for implementation. Speed here produces rework that no fixed fee absorbs.
You Want Someone To Hold The Keys
Key custody, transaction signing operations and treasury management sit outside what we do. Integrating with your signer is the extent of our involvement.
You Are Pre-TVL And Pre-Product
If there is no working product, no contract and no user, this is not yet an engineering engagement. Product and protocol work come first, and we would rather say so than invoice for it.
Building on a chain?
Tell us which chain, what your contract does, where key custody sits, and how far along your audit plan is. We will tell you honestly whether we are the right partner before you spend anything.