At Cyfrin CodeHawks, we pride ourselves on providing a transparent and fair competition environment. The Appeals Period is a testament to this commitment.

For 48 hours following judging, escalations will be accepted to contest judgments. This period will be clearly announced across all channels. During the 48 hours, interactions will be enabled on your GitHub submissions. During this time, you may leave comments detailing your escalation for re-assessment.

Appeals eligibility criteria

To enforce a fair and streamlined competition environment, to raise an appeal on a third-party submission (owned by other auditors), auditors must:

  1. Have at least one submission in the Contest they would be judging: This assures the community judge that they will possess the context and familiarity with the code necessary to provide an accurate and valid submission assessment.

  2. Have earned at least $200 USDC from previous CodeHawks competitions: This will further mitigate unqualified or inexperienced judges and serve as a Sybil defense mechanism.

  3. Have a total submission to valid submission ratio greater than or equal to 0.2 will ensure that only auditors who share Cyfrin's commitment to industry-leading quality can judge other submissions.

Preliminary results release

The unveiling of preliminary results takes place immediately after the conclusion of our judging process. This release serves as an initial insight into the standing of submissions and gives participants a sense of their performance.

Once the preliminary results are made public, an Appeal Period of precisely two days commences. This window allows participants to:

  • Raise concerns regarding their submissions.

  • Provide additional insights or clarifications.

  • Challenge the preliminary findings if they believe there are discrepancies.

How to raise an appeal

To initiate an appeal, navigate to your judged submission with the red notification dot, on the CodeHawks portal:

Read the community judges and lead judge comments in the provided comment box:

Suppose you don't believe the judge's decision is correct or have any questions about the judging results. In that case, you can add a new comment stating, in greater detail, why you believe a given issue is valid or invalid.

If you're challenging other entries, provide concise reasoning for any discrepancies identified.

Low-effort appeals risk being disregarded.

Important Points to Consider

  • Quality Over Quantity: While we appreciate thoroughness and attention to detail, we must ensure that appeals are well-reasoned and backed by substantial evidence. Appeals that appear hasty or lack clarity will be promptly closed.

  • Frequency of Appeals: Participants are encouraged to raise valid concerns. However, excessive appeals with little to no merit can lead to a situation where even valid concerns from the participant might be disqualified. We urge participants to be discerning and thoughtful in their approach.

Lead Judges of a contest will be responsible for assessing appeals during the appeals phase.

For any further feedback or concerns, participants can use our Feedback Form.

Last updated