Risk disclosures

Voiddeeds | 2026-10-19.2 | https://voiddeeds.xyz/risks

Read these operational and economic limits before authorizing a wallet request.

Experimental software and independent apps

Contracts and integrations may contain defects even after tests. Separate Runtime and gateway storage limits some failure paths but does not prove safety; shared bytecode, registries or oracles can affect many spaces. An app can lose assets or fail to execute withdrawals because of its own code or dependencies. Do not approve or deposit assets merely because an app appears in this directory.

Contract source, simulations and passing tests cover specific code and scenarios. They do not prove the absence of bugs, certify third-party code or guarantee that the deployed bytecode matches an unrelated repository. Immutable references can also preserve a defect: publishing a new document does not repair an existing contract.

A Gateway delegates execution to application code in its own storage context. Isolation from the Runtime does not protect the application's own storage, funds, external permissions or dependencies from its code. An application can also have its own privileged administrator. Inspect those powers before use.

Network, price and activation risk

RPC services, indexers, sequencers, networks and price feeds can be unavailable or stale. The testnet attestor and test price publisher are trusted roles. Ownership activation is asynchronous and paid by the owner; an earlier destination state remains effective until confirmed.

The destination registries trust an attestor signature; they are not a trustless bridge verifying source consensus. An unavailable, compromised or incorrectly configured attestor can prevent correct activation or attest incorrect state. The website's finality checks reduce a known risk but do not remove the trusted role.

The price publisher supplies test references for non-stable native assets. A nonzero toll quote stops when its reference is more than two hours old; zero tolls do not need that price. Arc uses a fixed USD 1 reference for its native test asset, which is a protocol assumption rather than a redemption promise. A feed can be recent and still economically wrong.

Destination state persists until a newer valid activation is confirmed. A canonical transfer alone does not stop payments to a previously activated destination owner. RPC disagreement, reorganization, sequencing delays and a lack of test gas can postpone the update.

Economic and permission risk

Toll income can be zero. Public historical totals do not predict future usage or returns. NFTs and other assets may be illiquid or lose their value; test assets have no promised redemption value. App approvals can expose assets beyond the toll amount. Wallet compromise and incorrect network/address selection may be irreversible.

Displayed USD and ETH equivalents are informational conversions. They are not a cash balance, claim against the operator or offer to exchange test assets for money. Revenue displays may lag events or use a previously successful cached snapshot; inspect their time and network. Adding amounts from different native currencies without conversion gives a misleading total.

A compromised key, deceptive application link, malicious approval or signature can expose assets far beyond a Deed toll. Keep recovery material offline and read the wallet’s final request. No document or receipt supplies insurance against compromise.

Failed payments and mandatory rights

Recipient rejection redirects its allocation to the treasury without a later claim in the contract. Treasury rejection or app failure can revert execution; gas can still be spent. Review all transaction details. This risk disclosure is not an exclusion of statutory liability, a guarantee of lawful offer, or investment, legal or tax advice.

Infrastructure and evidence limits

Hosting, database quotas, public RPC limits, testnet faucets and scheduled jobs can interrupt the website independently of contract state. Public profiles and historical acknowledgment evidence are off-chain and depend on stored records. A locally saved receipt helps preserve evidence but cannot restore a lost provider database by itself. Website wallet actions do not depend on an acknowledgment service.

Terms signatures establish control accepted by the wallet verifier for that message, not civil identity or continuing ownership of an NFT. Smart-contract wallets depend on their source-chain verification logic and can change their signing policy. A successful test using a generated account is not evidence that every deployed wallet is supported.