Discover Exposure
Start with clean visibility review. Understand where trust breaks down before committing to a larger rollout.
Public scanner, exposure review, and Polygon-first live surface.
WSEO · QEP · Z-GAP
WSEO scoring coreQEP witness layerZ-GAP secure accessPQC-ready · 5 familiesNIST ACVP evidence
CoverageEthereumPolygonBNB ChainAvalancheSolanaAlchemy
Make your
project
visible, trusted,ready.
One free 0–100 score for any EVM address, contract or domain — read what it means, then run yours in ~15 seconds.
The Quantum Trust Protocol
The quantum
trust protocol.
Make your project visible, trusted, and PQC-ready with a protocol-grade trust surface that explains technical reality without flattening it into marketing.
StygiaScore translates technical complexity into institutional narrative, helping serious teams explain what they are, how they operate, and what evidence supports their trust posture. That same narrative continues in the journal through the Quantum Scanner commercial framing, the Quantum Echo Protocol rollout, and the PQC Safe Payload update.
Verifiable by design
Don't trust us.
Verify it.
Live in production since 20 September 2026. Every certificate the engine issues carries both proofs inside the file itself, so a third party can check it without our API, without TLS, and without asking anyone — including us.
Integrity · Q-Seal, SHA-512
The certificate carries a SHA-512 digest of its own content. Recompute it and compare: if a single character changed, it will no longer match. Hashing is not affected by Shor's algorithm, so this check does not depend on elliptic curves.
Origin · ML-DSA-65, FIPS 204
The same digest is signed with a post-quantum scheme, and the issuer's public key travels inside the certificate. Its security rests on a lattice problem, not on factoring or discrete logarithms — the structure a quantum computer breaks — so authenticity does not degrade into "trust whoever signs with secp256k1".
The check runs in your browser
The verification page recomputes the seal and verifies the signature in your own tab, offline, with no trust in our servers. Verification is free by design: you pay to issue a certificate, not to check one.
What it does not claim
The seal proves the content is unchanged; the signature proves who signed it — and only because the key fingerprint it carries is checked against the one we publish outside the document. A signature on its own, verified with the public key the document itself carries, proves nothing about who wrote it: anyone can recompute a hash and sign with a key of their own. Neither claims the score is "true": the score is a measured heuristic, and the certificate states which parts are measured and which are advisory. There is no revocation list — a rotated or compromised key shows up as a different fingerprint, not as a recall notice.
Three Pillars of Trust
Built to be read,
not boxed.
WSEO Intelligence Galaxy
We map your project's visibility across 5 major chains, creating a trust surface that auditors can assess in minutes. Our scoring engine processes 847 data points per chain and translates scattered signals into actionable intelligence.
QEP Witness Layer
QEP turns isolated technical claims into structured evidence. It separates marketing from reality and keeps the public product aligned with what the backend can actually support today.
Z-GAP Secure Access
Proof without exposure. Z-GAP enables selective disclosure so teams can demonstrate capabilities without revealing protected architecture, private routes, or sensitive operating details.
PQC Certificate Signing — live
Since 20 September 2026 every certificate is signed with ML-DSA-65 (FIPS 204) over its own content digest, and any third party can verify that offline. What remains on the roadmap is on-chain trustlessness, explained without overstating it in the Safe payload and SP1 rollout note.
The Trust Translation Engine
Trust,
translated.
Serious teams build sophisticated infrastructure, but they still need a way to translate technical complexity into institutional narrative. StygiaScore exists to close that translation gap.
We do not blur marketing with technical reality. We surface what is public, what is active, and what remains roadmap. When the subject turns from discovery to operations, the story continues through the Z-GAP operational rollout and the Signature Swap Layer update, both of which explain how trust is enforced, not merely claimed.
We also operate as a small strategic Web3 studio with a strong R&D bias. We are most useful when a team has an unusual idea, an unexplored product angle, or a difficult trust problem and needs help understanding how it can become a credible build path.
WSEP · The measured ranking
Measured,
not sold.
WSEP is our web3 SEO presence score: what a project can be verified to do from outside, on its own domain, module by module. Nine measurements, no self-reported figures, no brand weighting, and the order is never for sale.
Two numbers look alike and are not: the table ranks domains against each other — post-quantum readiness measured first, then visibility — while the free score weighs web3 SEO visibility together with post-quantum risk and advises one project at a time. The honest way to read them: the ranking says where you stand, the free score says what to fix.
The pieces fit one way: the quantum scanner covers the post-quantum section and is one part of the free score, and Enterprise takes the same measurement deeper with scheduled re-runs and on-chain verification. See the measured ranking — five families, every row with its coverage, exclusions and withdrawals declared — or read how it is measured.
Three Moves to Clarity
Operating model
Verify Operational Trust
Move from isolated signals to structured review. Evaluate technical delivery, trust posture, and operational readiness.
Decision-ready reporting for counterparties, internal teams, and auditors.
Certify and Anchor
When evidence is strong enough, anchor certification outputs as durable records with provenance trail.
Governed evidence flow, durable records, and audit trace continuity.
Five Layers of Evidence
Review pillars
A stronger trust surface is never one metric. It is a layered review of visibility, delivery quality, security posture, evidence packaging, and provenance.
Pillar 01
Visibility Baseline
Discoverability, ownership clarity, and the public surface a serious third party can actually inspect.
Discoverability / Ownership clarity / Public surface
Pillar 02
Technical Readiness
Confidence, delivery quality, and whether institutional stakeholders can rely on operational continuity.
Delivery quality / Operational hygiene / Reliance review
Pillar 03
Security Posture
A clearer separation between marketing claims, observable evidence, and dependency-driven exposure.
Observable evidence / Dependency review / Security staging
Pillar 04
Evidence Packaging
Decision-ready outputs designed for partners, auditors, procurement, and internal stakeholders.
Decision-ready outputs / Exportable narratives / Stakeholder handoff
Pillar 05
Anchoring & Provenance
Durable records, provenance continuity, and an audit trace that survives the first review cycle.
Durable records / Provenance continuity / Audit trace
Questions
What teams ask
A few direct answers on CBOM, scoring, security posture, and the role of quantum-risk narratives inside the broader product.
Is CBOM already part of the product?+
CBOM is part of the direction, but it should exist as a complete backend-generated JSON output when the delivery path is ready. We do not present a fake or partial CBOM export as if it were already complete.
Are the scores meant to be the final product?+
No. Scores are useful as a visibility and trust signal, but they are not the full story. The platform is moving toward clearer evidence packaging, governed reviews, and certification-oriented outputs rather than score-only positioning.
What does security mean in the Stygia context?+
Security here means a broader trust posture: observable delivery quality, protected operating lanes, evidence discipline, and clearer separation between public claims and verifiable technical reality.
Is Stygia focused only on harvest-now-decrypt-later risk?+
No. Quantum risk matters, but Stygia is not limited to a single decrypt-later narrative. The broader focus is trust translation for Web3 teams, including visibility, operational clarity, evidence handling, and crypto-agile readiness.
Final CTA
Move.
If your team needs a stronger public trust surface, clearer evidence packaging, and a governed path toward certification outputs, start the conversation.