Sky SKY

Claim: No public cryptographic inventory of critical public-key mechanisms exists for the Sky Protocol.

Coverage basis: Absent

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No public cryptographic inventory: Sky has not published any inventory of critical public-key mechanisms or quantum threat model.

Assurance: Confirmed by exhaustive search of official docs, GitHub repos, governance forums, and industry reports. No crypto inventory document, quantum threat model, or affected-asset analysis was found across any primary or secondary source.

The absence of a cryptographic inventory is confirmed by the Eternax industry report (April 2026), which explicitly identifies Sky as lacking any disclosed quantum risk assessment or migration roadmap.

• https://sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/
• https://github.com/makerdao/sky
• https://eternax.ai

Claim: No quantum-specific evidence record exists supporting any assessment of Sky's cryptographic posture.

Coverage basis: Absent

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No evidence record of quantum risk assessment exists.

Assurance: No quantum-specific code references, specs, transaction examples, reproducible analytics, or audit evidence were found in any Sky Protocol source.

Classical smart-contract audits (ChainSecurity, Cantina) exist but contain no quantum or post-quantum scope. They serve as classical assurance only.

• https://sky.money/
• https://github.com/makerdao/sky

Claim: All SKY token and USDS stablecoin transactions rely on Ethereum L1 ECDSA signatures on secp256k1. No PQC or hybrid-PQC spend authorization exists.

Coverage basis: ECC-only, inherited from Ethereum L1

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: cap-applying

Quantum blocker: Active production spend authorization remains entirely ECC-only (Ethereum ECDSA).

Assurance: Confirmed by Sky Protocol official docs, GitHub source code (standard Solidity ERC-20-like contracts), and Ethereum's documented reliance on ECDSA/secp256k1.

SKY is a standard smart-contract governance token. All transaction authorization is delegated to Ethereum L1 ECDSA. The token has no independent signature scheme. Per QRI Token Inheritance rules, Sky inherits Ethereum's L1 quantum vulnerability for transaction signatures.

• https://sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/
• https://github.com/makerdao/sky
• https://ethereum.org/roadmap/future-proofing/quantum-resistance/

Claim: SKY token holders use standard Ethereum EOAs with long-exposure public keys. Any EOA that has sent a transaction has its public key permanently exposed on-chain, creating an indefinite attack window.

Coverage basis: Standard Ethereum account model, no PQ mitigations

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: Long-exposure quantum-vulnerable public keys for all transacted EOAs with no migration path.

Assurance: Ethereum's account model exposes the public key on first spend. Sky inherits this vulnerability. No Sky-specific key-derivation or address-format mitigation exists.

Accounts that have only received tokens (never sent) have not exposed their public key, providing partial protection. However, governance participants, large holders, and active DeFi users have almost certainly exposed keys.

• https://ethereum.org/roadmap/future-proofing/quantum-resistance/
• https://sky.money/

Claim: Sky's governance system (Chief contract, Pause Proxy, executive vote spells), SubDAO admin keys, and oracle feeds (Chronicle/Scribe) rely entirely on ECDSA-based Ethereum transactions and multi-sig configurations. No PQC or hybrid-PQC protection exists.

Coverage basis: ECC-only governance and oracle authentication

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: Governance multisigs, admin keys, and oracle feeds are entirely ECC-dependent with no quantum migration path.

Assurance: Confirmed by on-chain governance spell executions, official Sky governance documentation, and the Eternax report which identifies Sky's admin keys as quantum-vulnerable.

Sky does not operate its own consensus layer, but governance and oracle authentication serve a consensus-critical role for the protocol. Compromise of governance keys via quantum attack could authorize malicious parameter changes or drain protocol-controlled assets.

• https://vote.sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/
• https://eternax.ai

Claim: Sky's bridge dependencies (Skylink/LayerZero, Unichain native bridge, Optimism native bridge) rely on classical cryptographic verification (ECDSA-based signer sets, light-client verification). Bridge state integrity is quantum-vulnerable.

Coverage basis: ECC-dependent bridge verification

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: Medium

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: Bridge signer sets and light-client verification rely on classical cryptography, enabling quantum-enabled cross-chain theft.

Assurance: Skylink is reported as built on LayerZero infrastructure. Unichain and Optimism native bridges use canonical token bridge contracts governed by Sky's L1GovernanceRelay. The cryptographic details of LayerZero's signer set are not fully documented in Sky's public materials, but all evidence points to classical ECDSA/BLS dependency.

Sky's cross-chain expansion (Avalanche via Skylink, Unichain, Optimism) creates bridge attack surface. A quantum break of bridge verification could enable unauthorized minting of bridged assets on destination chains or theft of locked collateral on Ethereum.

• https://thedefiant.io
• https://vote.sky.money/

Claim: Sky Protocol has no privacy layer, shielded transactions, ZK-proof systems, or confidential transfer mechanisms.

Coverage basis: Not applicable

Implementation score: 1 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: none · Score treatment: not applicable

Assurance: N/A subfactor; no quantum vulnerability arises from a layer that does not exist.

• https://sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/

Claim: Sky does not operate an independent P2P network. All network communication is handled by Ethereum L1.

Coverage basis: Not applicable

Implementation score: 1 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: none · Score treatment: not applicable

Assurance: N/A subfactor.

• https://sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/

Claim: No PQ/hybrid wallet, custody, HSM, or hardware-wallet workflows exist for SKY or USDS. All custody relies on standard Ethereum ECDSA wallets.

Coverage basis: ECC-only wallet and custody paths

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No PQ/hybrid wallet or custody path exists for protocol participants.

Assurance: SKY/USDS are standard ERC-20 tokens supported by MetaMask and other Ethereum wallets. No wallet supports PQ signing for these tokens. No HSM or institutional custody solution offers PQ protection for Sky Protocol assets.

Governance multisigs, foundation treasuries, and SubDAO treasuries holding large SKY positions use standard Ethereum multi-sig wallets (e.g., Gnosis Safe) with ECDSA security.

• https://sky.money/
• https://metamask.io/price/usds

Claim: Approximately 0% of Sky's approximately $7.9B in stablecoin liabilities and associated governance-controlled value is protected from quantum key-recovery attacks.

Coverage basis: Less than 25% coverage, essentially zero

Implementation score: 0.05 · Evidence confidence: Medium

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: Approximately $7.9B in value-at-risk with zero quantum protection.

Assurance: The $7.9B figure comes from the BlockEden report (April 2026) describing Sky's stablecoin liabilities. Exact protected/unprotected breakdown cannot be computed because no protection exists. Coverage is 0% for all practical purposes. Per QRI 9.3.1, less than 25% coverage scores 1 out of 20 for this subfactor (implementation score 0.05).

Value-at-risk includes USDS circulating supply, sUSDS (staked USDS), governance-controlled treasuries, Spark Protocol TVL, bridge-locked collateral, and SubDAO-controlled assets. All are quantum-vulnerable. Dormant MKR/DAI that hasn't migrated to SKY/USDS adds additional vulnerable surface.

• https://blockeden.xyz
• https://eternax.ai

Claim: No critical wallets (treasuries, exchanges, custodians, bridges, foundations, major protocols) have been migrated to or protected by any PQC or hybrid-PQC mechanism.

Coverage basis: Zero critical wallet protection

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No critical wallets have been migrated to PQ/hybrid protection.

Assurance: Governance spell executions show multi-sig addresses (PauseProxy, Chief contract, SubDAO admin multisigs, SPK Company Multisig) all operating via standard Ethereum ECDSA transactions. No PQ address format, PQ signature, or hybrid scheme is used by any critical protocol wallet.

Critical wallets include the Pause Proxy, Chief contract, SPK Company Multisig, Spark SubProxy, Grove SubProxy, and Core Council Multisigs. All are ECC-only.

• https://vote.sky.money/
• https://sky.money/

Claim: No legacy quantum-vulnerable pools have been identified, measured, deprecated, migrated, frozen, or proven not to exist by design.

Coverage basis: No identification or deprecation of vulnerable pools

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No legacy vulnerable pool identification or deprecation exists.

Assurance: Parallel DAI/MKR system continues to operate alongside USDS/SKY. Legacy MKR governance and DAI stablecoin pools represent additional quantum-vulnerable surface that has not been inventoried, measured, or deprecated from a quantum perspective.

The MKR-to-SKY upgrade is a tokenomics migration (branding, supply ratio change), not a cryptographic migration. Legacy MKR holders who have not upgraded remain in a quantum-vulnerable state. No freeze, deprecation, or burn policy exists for quantum-vulnerable legacy positions.

• https://sky.money/

Claim: No public migration or protection roadmap exists for quantum security. The Eternax report (April 2026) explicitly confirms Sky has no disclosed post-quantum migration roadmap.

Coverage basis: No roadmap exists

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No post-quantum migration roadmap exists.

Assurance: Exhaustive search of Sky Forum, official docs, GitHub repositories, and governance proposals reveals zero quantum-related discussion. The Endgame Plan (v3) covers governance restructuring, SubDAO formation, collateral strategy, and tokenomics with no mention of cryptography, signatures, or quantum threats.

Sky's published roadmap (Endgame Plan, 2026 priorities) focuses on USDS supply growth, SubDAO Star launches, RWA scaling, and multi-chain deployment. Quantum security is entirely absent from all public planning documents.

• https://eternax.ai
• https://sky.money/
• https://forum.sky.money/
• https://makerdao.com/

Claim: No PQ/hybrid account creation, wallet tooling, transaction paths, custody paths, user-facing warnings, education, or migration prompts exist for Sky Protocol users.

Coverage basis: No migration tooling or accessibility

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No PQ/hybrid account creation, wallet tooling, or migration path exists for users.

Assurance: The sky.money interface provides token upgrade paths (MKR-to-SKY, DAI-to-USDS) for the tokenomics migration but contains no quantum-security warnings, education, or PQ account creation options.

Users cannot create a PQ-protected SKY account or migrate to a quantum-safe custody configuration through any Sky-provided tooling. The protocol defaults to quantum-vulnerable ECDSA accounts with no alternative.

• https://sky.money/
• https://github.com/makerdao/sky

Claim: No enforcement mechanisms exist (deprecation, freeze, disabled legacy signing, restricted withdrawals, unsafe-path blocking, mandatory migration deadlines). No exchange, custody, bridge, wallet, or infrastructure coordination exists for quantum migration.

Coverage basis: No enforcement or coordination

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No migration enforcement or ecosystem coordination for quantum security.

Assurance: Sky's governance system has enforcement capabilities (GSM Pause Delay, freezability switch on USDS, Protego cancellation module) but none have been configured or purposed for quantum migration enforcement.

The USDS freezability switch (never activated) and GSM Pause Delay (currently 24 hours) are existing governance enforcement tools that could theoretically be repurposed for quantum migration enforcement, but no proposal, plan, or governance discussion exists to do so.

• https://sky.money/
• https://forum.sky.money/

Claim: No quantum-specific emergency disclosure process, incident-response playbook, or governance mechanism exists for quantum-related vulnerabilities.

Coverage basis: No quantum-specific IR process

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: assurance-only caveat · Score treatment: score-reducing

Assurance: Per QRI Section 8.2, the absence of a formal quantum-specific incident-response playbook does not by itself create a Readiness & Risk Cap. However, it does reduce the Implementation Score for this subfactor to 0.00 since no quantum IR process exists at all.

Sky has general governance security mechanisms (GSM Pause Delay, Protego cancellation, Emergency Shutdown Module disabled in Phase One upgrade) but none are documented, tested, or purposed for quantum-specific incident response.

• https://sky.money/
• https://forum.sky.money/

Claim: Sky Protocol uses no PQC, hybrid-PQC, or quantum-resistant algorithms anywhere in its stack.

Coverage basis: No PQC algorithms in use

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No NIST-standardized or reviewed PQC algorithms are used.

Assurance: Sky's smart contracts are standard Solidity using OpenZeppelin libraries and MakerDAO's own DSS framework. No reference to ML-KEM, ML-DSA (Dilithium), SLH-DSA (SPHINCS+), XMSS, LMS, or any other PQC algorithm exists in the codebase.

All cryptographic operations (hashing via Keccak-256, signatures via ECDSA/secp256k1) use classical algorithms standardized for Ethereum. No bespoke or custom cryptography is implemented at the Sky Protocol level.

• https://github.com/makerdao/sky
• https://sky.money/

Claim: Existing audits (ChainSecurity, Cantina) cover classical smart-contract security only. No audit addresses any quantum or post-quantum cryptographic scope.

Coverage basis: Classical audits only, no quantum scope

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: assurance-only caveat · Score treatment: score-reducing

Assurance: ChainSecurity and Cantina audits are current (2025) and relevant for classical smart-contract security but are scope-mismatched for quantum readiness. They review token conversion logic, governance integration, and minting assumptions, with no PQC algorithm review, side-channel analysis, or quantum threat modeling.

The absence of a quantum-scope audit is a direct consequence of there being no PQC implementation to audit. The Implementation Score is 0.00 because no quantum-critical implementation exists, not because audits are missing.

• https://www.chainsecurity.com/security-audit/makerdao-sky-smart-contracts
• https://cantina.xyz/portfolio/5afcb016-c1e8-4e42-8245-87857f8e1e1a

Claim: Sky's classical smart contracts are open source (GitHub: makerdao/sky), but no quantum-critical implementation exists to be open-sourced or reproduced.

Coverage basis: Classical code is open source; no PQ code exists

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No quantum-critical implementation exists to be open-sourced.

Assurance: Sky's Solidity contracts are publicly available and buildable. This supports classical security review but provides no quantum assurance. The subfactor scores 0 because there is no quantum-secure implementation to evaluate for openness or reproducibility.

The classical codebase is well-structured and auditable, but this subfactor specifically concerns the quantum-critical implementation, which does not exist.

• https://github.com/makerdao/sky

Claim: No documented parameter agility or future upgrade path exists for migrating cryptographic primitives to post-quantum algorithms.

Coverage basis: No parameter agility documented

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: quantum-critical vulnerability · Score treatment: score-reducing

Quantum blocker: No parameter agility or cryptographic upgrade path is documented.

Assurance: Sky's governance system can upgrade contracts via executive spells, providing a theoretical upgrade path. However, no documentation, specification, or design exists for how signature scheme agility, key format migration, or algorithm parameter changes would be handled.

Ethereum's planned EIP-8141 (account abstraction for PQ signatures, targeting Hegotá hard fork H2 2026) could eventually provide signature agility at the L1 level, benefiting Sky. But Sky has no documented plan to integrate with or prepare for this Ethereum upgrade.

• https://sky.money/
• https://forum.sky.money/

Claim: Sky Protocol uses no stateful signature schemes (XMSS, LMS, or similar). This subfactor is not applicable.

Coverage basis: Not applicable

Implementation score: 1 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: none · Score treatment: not applicable

Assurance: N/A subfactor.

• https://github.com/makerdao/sky

Claim: No performance or resource-impact analysis exists for PQ signature/verification costs in the context of Sky Protocol operations.

Coverage basis: No PQ performance analysis

Implementation score: 0 · Evidence confidence: High

Issue classification: assurance-only caveat · Score treatment: score-reducing

Assurance: Per QRI Section 8.2, the absence of a formal performance benchmark does not by itself create a Readiness & Risk Cap. However, the Implementation Score is 0.00 because no analysis exists at all, and the absence is relevant since PQ signatures are significantly larger than ECDSA (e.g., ML-DSA at approximately 2.5KB vs ECDSA at approximately 65 bytes), which would affect gas costs for governance votes, bridge transactions, and oracle updates on Ethereum.

PQ signature sizes would materially affect Sky's on-chain operations: governance vote casting, executive spell execution, bridge message passing, and oracle updates all incur Ethereum gas costs proportional to calldata size. No analysis has been done on the economic or operational impact of a PQ transition.