Solutions
Four places a structural answer changes the outcome.
Argus answers one question — what stands behind this counterparty — in the moment before a signature. What changes across these surfaces is the cost of getting that answer wrong.
Autonomous wallets
Agents sign faster than anyone reviews structure
An agent wallet executes on user-defined permissions, often without real-time human review. Allowlists and spending caps bound how much and to whom by name; they say nothing about what the counterparty is made of.
- What goes wrong
- An agent approves an allowance to a contract that passes every direct check, while the implementation it delegates to is controlled by an address nobody assessed.
- What address-only screening misses
- Deployer provenance, upgrade authority, and the dependency that actually executes when the call lands.
- Where Argus sits
- Between the agent's intent and the wallet's signing call — before a signature exists.
- What it returns
- A verdict, the reasoning behind it, and a disposition the execution boundary enforces.
Agentic commerce
Counterparties nobody vetted by hand
Machine-initiated payments reach merchants, services and contracts selected at runtime. The volume makes manual review impossible and the selection logic makes an allowlist stale on arrival.
- What goes wrong
- Payment flows widen to counterparties chosen by a model, with no structural basis for trusting the address it picked.
- What address-only screening misses
- Whether a newly-encountered counterparty shares a deployer with contracts already known to be a problem.
- Where Argus sits
- In the payment authorisation path, as a pre-sign decision rather than a post-hoc alert.
- What it returns
- A deterministic verdict per transaction and an explainable record for the risk function.
Stablecoin transaction infrastructure
High-volume paths with one control in the way
Transfer infrastructure moves value continuously and is judged on both throughput and defensibility. An address-level allowlist is cheap to run and hard to defend when something goes wrong.
- What goes wrong
- A compliant-looking transfer path routes through a contract whose dependency carries exposure the direct check never sees.
- What address-only screening misses
- Inherited exposure, and the difference between a clean check and a check that never ran.
- Where Argus sits
- In front of the transfer execution call, without holding funds or keys.
- What it returns
- A verdict, a coverage summary showing what was actually established, and an optional signed record.
Wallet and protocol infrastructure
Executing on behalf of other people
Platforms that sign for their users inherit their users' counterparty risk, and are expected to explain every transaction they let through to auditors, partners and regulators.
- What goes wrong
- A platform-wide policy cannot be evidenced after the fact because nothing recorded which version applied to which transaction.
- What address-only screening misses
- The link between a specific decision, the policy that produced it, and the evidence it relied on.
- Where Argus sits
- As a decision layer in the platform's own signing path, invoked per transaction.
- What it returns
- Versioned policy decisions and a receipt binding payload, policy, disposition and reasoning together.
Bring your execution path
The fastest way to evaluate Argus is to describe the transaction path you already run and the control that currently stands in front of it.