Securing the Web 3.0 world: From code audits to Zero Trust Architecture

The Web 3.0 world is driven by code and cryptography, and blockchain stands as the emblem of digital trust, an incorruptible ledger promising decentralisation.

In the rapidly evolving landscape of Web 3.0, where code and cryptography drive innovation and blockchain stands as the emblem of digital trust, a paradox has emerged. As billions flow through smart contracts and token economies, the issue of blockchain security becomes increasingly pressing.

This paradox arises from the fact that while blockchain is designed to foster agility and decentralisation, the increasing sophistication of cyberattacks poses significant challenges to this vision.

From smart contract loopholes to weak wallet keys and the broader digital asset spectrum, a multi-layered approach is paramount. In February 2025, the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) seized ₹1.08 crore during a crypto fraud probe, highlighting the misuse of digital currencies in financial crimes.

This incident, part of a broader investigation into a crypto scam that began in 2020, underscores the urgency of securing the digital asset ecosystem. Despite blockchain’s reputation for being tamper-resistant, the ecosystem surrounding it—exchanges, wallets, smart contracts and user endpoints—remains vulnerable.

Trust boundaries are tested as illicit actors refine their tactics, spanning social engineering to exploiting protocol flaws.

Securing digital assets requires a multi-layered approach, including rigorous code audits, real-time threat detection, regulatory alignment and ongoing education for users and developers. To truly understand the blockchain security ecosystem, it’s essential to move beyond the notion of it being a singular concept.

In the broadest sense, blockchain can be viewed as a collection of interdependent layers, each with its security requirements and vulnerabilities. Every element contributes to the system’s overall integrity, beginning with the protocol layer that defines consensus mechanisms and economic parameters.

Above this are smart contracts, small programs designed to carry out specific tasks or agreements in a verifiable and automated manner. A flaw in one layer, such as an unaudited smart contract, can expose an otherwise secure network to massive exploits—as seen in numerous DeFi (Decentralised Finance) breaches where a single smart contract vulnerability led to the theft of millions.

Equally important is the role of wallets and key management, where a single compromised private key can mean the irrevocable loss of digital assets. And with blockchain bridges facilitating interoperability between chains, the complexity—and risk—only intensifies.

Organisations are unlocking new liquidity and fractional ownership by representing physical assets like art, commodities or real estate as blockchain-based tokens. However, this also expands the attack surface.

Tokenised assets introduce new risks—from incorrect metadata and faulty smart contracts to manipulation of the underlying data. A compromised tokenised asset doesn’t just threaten a digital token—it can call into question ownership and legal rights in the real world.

Securing these assets, therefore, requires more than just technical audits. It needs regulatory clarity, and secure integration between digital and physical record-keeping systems. Although businesses are increasingly recognising the importance of tokenisation, 76% of firms plan to invest in tokenised assets by 2026.

But there remains a critical need to approach every component of the blockchain ecosystem with equal vigilance. As we move into a decentralised future, the lines between online and offline security will blur even further.

One of the emerging security frameworks is Zero Trust Architecture. It simply means never automatically trusting anyone or anything, inside or outside the system. Every user, transaction or device is verified continuously, ensuring that even if a hacker gets in, they can’t move freely or access critical data without re-authentication. It is like installing checkpoints throughout a secure building instead of just at the main entrance.

Then there’s Multi-Party Computation (MPC), a more advanced yet practical way to manage digital keys. Instead of storing the entire private key in one place (where it could be stolen or lost), MPC splits it into parts and stores them in multiple locations. No single party ever has full access, making it nearly impossible for hackers to compromise it entirely.

Similarly, AML/KYC compliance ensures that users transacting in crypto are verified and monitored to detect suspicious activity. These tools are crucial in deterring fraud and creating a more accountable digital financial system.

Smart contract audits act as a critical checkpoint before any smart contract goes live. Much like how software undergoes rigorous testing or legal documents are reviewed before finalisation, smart contracts must be inspected for hidden bugs, logical loopholes or vulnerabilities that malicious actors could exploit.

Without this step, millions of digital assets can be drained in seconds through a flaw in the code. Audits help ensure that the trust encoded into these contracts holds up under real-world conditions.

However, security is not limited to code; it is also about the people interacting with it. That’s where Decentralised Identity (DID) comes into play. As users increasingly move across decentralised platforms, DID gives individuals ownership over their digital credentials without relying on centralised authorities like banks or governments.

With DID, users can choose what information to share and with whom, minimising the risk of identity theft, data misuse