Protocol & dApp architecture review
On-chain/off-chain boundaries: what belongs in contracts, what belongs in services, upgrade and governance mechanics, degradation under load.
Most Web3 systems don't struggle on the contract — they struggle around it: indexing pipelines that fall behind, RPC bills that scale faster than users, settlement books that never quite reconcile with the chain, and wallet flows users abandon. Beneventa Tech designs that layer. Your team, your vendors and your licensed partners build and operate it.
On-chain/off-chain boundaries: what belongs in contracts, what belongs in services, upgrade and governance mechanics, degradation under load.
Self-hosted vs managed strategy, provider redundancy, rate-limit and cost engineering, archive vs full-node planning.
Event ingestion, reorg handling, backfill strategy, subgraph vs custom indexer trade-offs, serving layers.
MPC vs multisig vs HSM with your licensed custodian or wallet vendor; signing workflows, rotation and recovery as operational process design.
Ledger design, reconciliation between on-chain events and internal books, idempotency, chain selection. Operated by you and your licensed payment partners — never by us.
Reconciliation trails, proof-of-reserve-style statements, dashboards your finance team and external accountants can rely on.
ERC-4337 stacks, paymasters and gas sponsorship, session keys, social recovery — so users stop seeing seed phrases and failed transactions.
Rollup and appchain selection, bridge and messaging architecture, state fragmentation trade-offs, chain-abstraction patterns.
Testing and simulation on forked networks, release and upgrade management, dependency policy, onboarding-grade documentation.
On-chain analytics with ML, anomaly and pattern detection on transaction streams for product insight, LLM-assisted monitoring and support, agent infrastructure that reads chain state reliably.
Illustrative. Dashed green nodes are run by the client or the client's licensed providers; solid nodes are systems we help the client's engineers design and build. Beneventa Tech appears nowhere in the runtime path.
▩ dashed = client / licensed third party operates · ▩ solid = client builds to our design
Every engagement produces a filled-in version of this matrix with reasoning per row. Options listed are examples, not endorsements.
| Layer | Typical options | What actually decides it |
|---|---|---|
| Execution | Ethereum L1 · OP-stack / Arbitrum rollups · Solana · appchains | Finality needs, fee tolerance, ecosystem of the users you already have |
| Node access | Self-hosted · managed RPC · hybrid with failover | Request volume and shape, archive needs, ops headcount, unit cost at 10× scale |
| Indexing | Subgraphs · custom indexer · vendor firehose | Query patterns, reorg sensitivity, backfill volume, schema ownership |
| Wallets / accounts | EOA + vendor wallet · MPC custodian · ERC-4337 smart accounts | Who your users are, regulatory posture of your licensed partners, recovery UX |
| Settlement asset | USD-backed stablecoins on the chains above | Issuer support per chain, your PSP's coverage, treasury policy set by the client |
| Data & ML | Lakehouse + streaming · vendor analytics · in-product models | Latency of the decisions the data feeds, team skill set, cost per query |
Clear boundaries make the advisory useful. These are scoped out of every engagement:
We never hold, generate or have access to client or end-user private keys, seed phrases or funds — in production or in test.
We don't design tokenomics, run token sales, or advise on issuing, listing or marketing any token.
No market-making, treasury trading strategies, staking-as-a-service or yield products — and no advice on them.
Settlement systems we design are operated by clients and their licensed providers. We are not a payment institution and don't act as one.
Hong Kong Office · Level 3, Cyberport 5, 100 Cyberport Road, Hong Kong