This document maps target Stellar ecosystem stakeholders, explains why each cares about trust-minimised HTLC swaps, identifies what they can evaluate today, and captures the concrete ask plus follow-up state.
No private contact data is stored here. All entries reference public organisations or ecosystem categories.
| Field | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Why they care | The specific angle that makes HTLC atomicity valuable to this stakeholder |
| Evaluate today | A concrete link or artefact they can assess right now (testnet, docs, code) |
| Ask | The one thing we want from this conversation |
| Status | not-contacted · outreach-sent · in-conversation · closed |
Update Status and Last touch whenever a conversation moves.
Why they care. The Foundation runs grants, hackathon tracks, and ecosystem-distribution channels. A non-custodial Soroban HTLC bridge with open-source contracts is a flagship demonstration of what Soroban enables beyond simple token transfers. Trust-minimised swaps are a gap they have explicitly flagged in their developer relations materials.
Evaluate today.
- Soroban HTLC contract — 10 passing contract tests, deployed on Stellar testnet.
- Testnet deployment
Ask. Request a 30-minute technical review call and ask whether the project qualifies for the Stellar Community Fund or a featured slot in the developer newsletter.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. The Stellar Community Fund specifically funds infrastructure that grows on-chain utility. An atomic bridge with no privileged signer set is exactly the kind of permissionless infrastructure that SCF has funded in previous rounds (anchor tooling, DEX aggregators).
Evaluate today.
- ARCHITECTURE.md — invariant proofs, refund-layer stack, threat model summary.
- TRUST_MODEL.md — STRIDE analysis and per-actor trust guarantees.
Ask. Submit a grant application and request a reviewer introduction from any existing SCF grantee who can vouch for the technical depth.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care.
Fusion+ resolver operators already operate per-order escrow with
secret-reveal mechanics on EVM chains. OverSync extends that exact
pattern to Stellar. Adding the OverSync resolver runner gives them
XLM-side inventory without changing their operational model. The
ResolverRegistry (stake + slash) is directly analogous to the Fusion+
resolver whitelist.
Evaluate today.
- resolver/ — open-source runner + Docker image.
- docs/RESOLVERS.md — how to stake and run against the testnet registry.
- EVM ResolverRegistry
Ask. Request a resolver trial: run the Docker image against testnet and report whether the operational surface (stake, fill, claim, refund) matches their existing Fusion+ runbook. Aim for a joint announcement on the Fusion+ integration ahead of mainnet.
Status. outreach-sent (initial contact per TRACTION.md)
Last touch. May 2026
Why they care. Freighter is the dominant Stellar browser wallet. A built-in OverSync flow lets Freighter users bridge ETH into XLM without leaving the wallet. The non-custodial guarantee (user always holds the refund path) aligns with Freighter's self-custody positioning. No wrapped token sits between the user and their funds.
Evaluate today.
- Frontend flow — React dApp UI on testnet; the Freighter adapter already wires Stellar signing.
- SDK docs —
@oversync/sdkexposes typed order primitives that a wallet integration can consume directly.
Ask. Request a UX feedback session: have a Freighter team member complete a testnet swap end-to-end and report friction points. We will act on every finding before mainnet.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. Lobstr is Stellar's most widely used mobile wallet. Mobile users are the largest XLM holder demographic. Embedding a trust-minimised bridge flow natively avoids routing users to a third-party dApp — a common support and retention concern for Lobstr.
Evaluate today.
- Live testnet frontend at
https://testnet.oversync.app— accessible in a mobile browser as a bridge walkthrough. - ARCHITECTURE.md §6 — four-layer refund stack that protects non-technical mobile users even if they close the app mid-swap.
Ask. Wallet UX feedback and an informal discussion on what a Lobstr-native integration would require (WalletConnect support, deep link scheme, SDK wrapper). No commitment asked.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care.
DEXes on Stellar need cross-chain liquidity to grow their asset
catalogue. Validator-set bridges deliver wrapped representations
(axlETH, allETH) that add a layer of smart-contract dependency.
OverSync delivers the native ETH or ERC-20 token, which the DEX can
list directly without wrapping risk. For yield-bearing or rebasing
assets this difference is material.
Evaluate today.
- DIFFERENTIATION.md — native vs wrapped asset comparison.
- Soroban HTLC testnet — live contract that DEX developers can inspect.
Ask. A technical call to understand their liquidity intake path and confirm whether a native-asset delivery model opens new listing categories they cannot support with wrapped assets today.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. Anchors are the on/off-ramp layer for Stellar. They hold the fiat settlement risk and need cross-chain capital efficiency. An anchor serving remittance corridors between Ethereum-ecosystem users and Stellar end-users benefits from an atomic swap path that does not introduce a new custody relationship mid-flight.
Evaluate today.
- TRUST_MODEL.md — proof that coordinator and resolver never hold user funds (funds only move via sha256 preimage reveal or permissionless refund).
- TRACTION.md §1.4 — treasury/OTC desk value proposition at the $25k–$500k swap size that anchors operate in.
Ask. A brief discovery call: do any of their corridor flows have an ETH-side leg where trust-minimised settlement would reduce their counterparty exposure? No product commitment required.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. OverSync's Q4 2026 milestone explicitly requires two external audits (one EVM, one Soroban). Soroban audit capability is rare — few firms have shipped Soroban audit reports. Early engagement lets auditors schedule capacity and optionally provide pre-audit guidance that reduces remediation cycles.
Evaluate today.
- contracts/contracts/v2/ — 150 lines of Solidity; HTLCEscrow + ResolverRegistry. Surface is narrow by design.
- soroban/contracts/htlc/src/lib.rs — Rust Soroban contract, 10 unit tests.
- SECURITY.md — STRIDE threat model and auditor checklist.
Ask. Request a scoping call to get a capacity commitment for Q4 2026 and an indication of whether the firm has Soroban-specific experience.
Status. not-contacted (shortlist drafted per TRACTION.md)
Last touch. —
Why they care. Immunefi hosts bounty programmes for DeFi protocols. A bridge with a formal bounty programme signals security maturity to both users and institutional partners. Immunefi benefits from on-boarding a technically novel HTLC-based protocol — their audience of security researchers finds HTLC edge-case exploration interesting.
Evaluate today.
- SECURITY.md — attack surface summary and existing STRIDE-level threat model.
- ROADMAP.md §Q4 2026 — bounty programme is a milestone-gated deliverable.
Ask. Request a programme-setup consultation to understand scope definition requirements, minimum bounty sizing, and the review timeline so we can plan the Q4 launch window accurately.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. OTC desks move large blocks and cannot absorb custodial bridge risk. $500k crossing a validator-set bridge is $500k exposed to an attester compromise. An HTLC swap where the worst-case outcome is a timelock refund — not a validator compromise — is the correct trust model for institutional settlement at this size.
Evaluate today.
- README.md — Trust model in one paragraph — the clearest single-paragraph statement of the guarantee.
- ARCHITECTURE.md — Refund layers — four independent recovery paths; even coordinator downtime cannot strand funds.
Ask. A short (15-minute) technical brief on the trust model with focus on worst-case failure modes. No volume commitments asked; we want a reference customer quote on the trust model for the mainnet launch.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. Protocols like Aave, Compound, and Morpho have been fielding questions about Stellar expansion as CCTP v2 and Axelar ITS bring Stellar into the EVM composability conversation. An HTLC-backed bridge means they can move collateral atomically — no wrapped-token discount to manage.
Evaluate today.
- DIFFERENTIATION.md — CCTP v2 comparison — explains how OverSync and CCTP v2 are complementary in a single flow.
- packages/sdk/ —
@oversync/sdkexposes anExternalBridgeRouteabstraction that third-party protocols can implement without forking the core.
Ask. Request a 20-minute integration walkthrough and confirm whether any team members are attending Meridian 2026 (Stellar conference) where a live demo session is planned.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Why they care. Investors in the Stellar ecosystem want bridge infrastructure that does not inherit the catastrophic tail-risk of past bridge hacks. An HTLC- only model with no admin escape hatch is a fundamentally different risk profile from Ronin or Wormhole. Demonstrating a working testnet before asking for capital reduces underwriting uncertainty.
Evaluate today.
- deployments.testnet.json — live contract addresses, verifiable on block explorers today.
- ROADMAP.md — milestone-by-milestone delivery with verifiable artefacts; no un-evidenced claims.
Ask. Request a pitch meeting or written feedback on the technical architecture, specifically whether the trust model is differentiated enough to support a Tranche 2 grant application.
Status. not-contacted
Last touch. —
Copy and adapt this template for any cold outreach. Replace the bracketed fields. Keep the message under 200 words.
Subject: OverSync — trust-minimised ETH↔XLM bridge, testnet live
Hi [Name / Team],
I'm reaching out because [one sentence on why this specific group
is relevant — e.g. "you run a Fusion+ resolver" or "Freighter
users ask about ETH bridging regularly"].
We built OverSync: a non-custodial Ethereum ↔ Stellar bridge
where settlement is a sha256 preimage reveal — no validator set,
no admin keys, no wrapped tokens. The worst-case outcome for a
user is a permissionless timelock refund, not a multisig exploit.
The v2 contracts are live on testnet today:
• Soroban HTLC: CDIKSJKVMX…WK2CTA6JK (Stellar testnet)
• HTLCEscrow: 0xb352339B…bB178 (Sepolia)
• Open-source code and docs: https://github.com/karagozemin/OverSync-1nchFusion
The one thing I'd like from you: [specific ask — e.g. "30 minutes
to walk through the resolver runner" or "a UX pass on the testnet
swap flow" or "an intro to your grants committee contact"].
Happy to send the architecture doc or set up a short call.
[Your name]
| # | Stakeholder | Ask type | Status | Last touch |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Stellar Foundation — Dev Programmes | Intro / review call | not-contacted |
— |
| 2 | SCF Grants Committee | Grant application | not-contacted |
— |
| 3 | 1inch Network — Fusion+ | Resolver trial | outreach-sent |
May 2026 |
| 4 | Freighter Wallet | UX feedback | not-contacted |
— |
| 5 | Lobstr Wallet | UX feedback | not-contacted |
— |
| 6 | Stellar DEXes (SDEX / Soroswap / Phoenix) | Integration call | not-contacted |
— |
| 7 | Stellar Anchors (MoneyGram et al.) | Discovery call | not-contacted |
— |
| 8 | Audit firms (Trail of Bits, OtterSec, et al.) | Scoping call | not-contacted |
— |
| 9 | Immunefi | Programme setup | not-contacted |
— |
| 10 | Institutional OTC (Cumberland, Wintermute, GSR) | Technical brief | not-contacted |
— |
| 11 | EVM DeFi protocols (Aave, Compound, Morpho) | Integration walkthrough | not-contacted |
— |
| 12 | Stellar-focused VCs / grant funds | Pitch / feedback | not-contacted |
— |