At Cantina, we’re all about pushing boundaries to make the code review process better for everyone involved. Earlier this week, we took an industry-first, significant step by mandating valid proofs of concept (POCs) for all high and medium finding submissions in competitions and bounties.

Today, we’re building on that momentum with **two updates** designed to improve transparency, reward top researchers, and ensure everyone’s time is used wisely: **Researcher Reputation Scores** and an optimzed **Pings** system.

Here’s everything you need to know.

## Researcher Reputation Scores: Building Trust Through Consistency

The reputation score is our way of recognizing and rewarding researchers for consistent, high-quality contributions. It reflects reliability, expertise, and the outcomes of submissions, making it easier for top performers to stand out and for projects to assess submissions at speed. We’ve been quietly calculating **Researcher Reputation Scores** for months, and now, we’re ready to make them public. Starting today, researchers can see their scores directly on their Cantina profiles.

### Why Are We Surfacing Reputation Scores Now?

For months, we’ve been figuring out the best way to calculate and track reputation scores to better understand how researchers contribute to the ecosystem. Now, we’re ready to share these scores with the community to drive transparency, incentivize excellence, and make code review more efficient for everyone.

### The Big Perk: No POCs for Top Researchers

As an add on to [our previous update](https://x.com/cantinaxyz/status/1859320738844639419), researchers with a **reputation score of 80 or higher** will no longer be required to submit POCs for high and medium findings. This trust-based system reduces the workload for top contributors while maintaining what the POC mandate aims to achieve: high-quality submissions from researchers, and minimal time-wasting for projects.

### How is Your Reputation Score Calculated?

Reputation scores range from **0 to 100 points**, with all researchers starting at a baseline of **50 points**. Points are added or subtracted based on the quality and outcome of submissions.

### Scoring Rules:

**Confirmed Findings**

- Critical/High Severity: **+5 points**
- Medium Severity: **+3 points**
- Low/Informational/Gas Severity: **+1 point**
- Accepted Escalations: **+TBD**

**Negative Outcomes**

- Spam Findings: **–5 points**
- Rejected Findings: **–3 points**
- Rejected Escalations: **–TBD**

**Submission Quality Multiplier**

Each submission is evaluated for quality, which acts as a multiplier on points gained or lost:

- **Low**: –10% of points
- Medium: No change (baseline)
- High: +20% of points

> Note: Spam findings do not apply the quality multiplier.
> 

### Examples of Score Calculations:

**Example 1: Confirmed High Severity Finding with Level 3 Quality**

- **Base Points**: +5 (for confirmed high severity)
- **Quality Multiplier**: +20% (Level 3)

**Calculation**:

- Quality Bonus: 5 points × 20% = **+1 point**
- Total Points Gained: 5 + 1 = **+6 points**

**Updated Reputation Score**:

- Starting Score: 50
- New Score: 50 + 6 = **56 points**

**Example 2: Rejected Finding with Level 1 Quality**

- **Base Points**: –3 (for rejected finding)
- **Quality Multiplier**: –10% (Level 1)

**Calculation**:

- Quality Penalty: (–3 points) × (–10%) = **+0.3 points**
- Total Points Lost: –3 + 0.3 = **–2.7 points**

**Updated Reputation Score**:

- Starting Score: 50
- New Score: 50 – 2.7 = **47.3 points**

**Example 3: Spam Finding**

- **Base Points**: –5 (for spam finding)
- **Quality Multiplier**: Not applicable

**Updated Reputation Score**:

- Starting Score: 50
- New Score: 50 – 5 = **45 points**

**Example 4: Rejected Escalation**

- **Base Points**: –3 (for rejected escalation)
- **Quality Multiplier**: Not specified, assume baseline

**Updated Reputation Score**:

- Starting Score: 50
- New Score: 50 – 3 = **47 points**

## An Optimized Ping System: Access Based on Reputation

We’re also rolling out updates to our [pings system](https://docs.cantina.xyz/cantina-docs/cantina-code/cantina-code-for-security-researchers/comments-and-pings), ensuring that reputation drives access.

The number of pings you are granted in Cantina Code will depend on your proven level of expertise:

- LSRs: 8,192 pings
- SRs: 64 pings
- ASRs: 32 pings
- Cantina researchers with >$1,000 payouts: 8 pings
- All others: 0 pings

This update reflects our shift toward prioritizing access for contributors with a proven reputation.

### What’s Next?

Both of these updates are part of a larger effort to create a system where reputation drives opportunity, trust, and efficiency. For researchers, this means clearer pathways to recognition and more tools to showcase your expertise. For projects, it’s another step toward seamless collaboration and higher confidence in the process.

Log in to your [Cantina profile](https://cantina.xyz/) now to see your reputation score for the first time.

We’re just getting started. This is the first of many steps we’re taking to make Cantina the best platform for researchers and projects alike.

Let’s keep building together.
## 

Cantina is your go-to for comprehensive end-to-end security. Looking to secure your protocol? Let’s talk. We can have a full quote turned around for you within 24 hours, catered exactly to your project’s needs. Request a quote [here](https://cantina.xyz/).

POCs to Pings: How Reputation Transforms Security Collaboration