Skip to main content
This page is for CISOs, compliance officers, and security engineers evaluating Para’s security posture. It covers custody classification, regulatory implications, audit history, data handling, and the controls that underpin Para’s trust model.

Custody Classification

Para uses a 2-of-2 Multi-Party Computation (MPC) architecture where the private key is split between the user’s device and Para’s cloud hardware security modules (HSMs). The full key is never held by any single party (not Para, not the integrating application, not the user’s device alone).
PropertyDetails
Custody modelSelf-custodial / non-custodial. The integrating application does not take custody of user funds
Key assemblyThe full private key is never assembled at any point: not during generation, signing, or recovery
Regulatory postureNon-custodial architecture simplifies regulatory requirements, enabling faster launches in new markets without the licensing overhead associated with custodial wallet models
Para’s roleInfrastructure provider. Para holds one key share in HSMs but cannot produce valid signatures without the user’s share

Regulatory Posture

AreaStatus
SOC 2 Type IICompliant
Penetration testingPara regularly undergoes system-wide penetration tests
GDPR / data privacyPara does not collect or store any personally identifying information unless used as a login method (e.g., email address or phone number)
InsuranceSelf-Serve / BYO
To request compliance documentation or audit reports, contact the Para team at security@getpara.com.

Security Audits

Para is SOC 2 Type II compliant and regularly undergoes system-wide audits and penetration tests covering its cryptographic implementations, infrastructure, and API surface.

Audit Scope

Audits cover the following areas:
AreaWhat is reviewed
MPC implementationDKLS19 algorithm correctness, distributed key generation, signing ceremony integrity
Cryptographic primitivesKey derivation, elliptic curve operations (secp256k1 / secp256r1), random number generation
InfrastructureCloud HSM configuration, network segmentation, access controls, secrets management
API securityAuthentication flows, session management, rate limiting, input validation
Recovery flowsRecovery secret generation, key rotation process, multi-factor verification, 48-hour delay enforcement

Data Handling

Data typeHow it’s handled
User Share (MPC key)Stored on the user’s device only. Never transmitted unencrypted. Never accessible to Para or the integrating application
Para Share (MPC key)Stored in Para’s cloud HSMs. Cannot produce a valid signature alone
Recovery secretGenerated client-side and shared with the user. Para does not have access to it
User identity (email)Used for wallet association and recovery. Stored encrypted at rest
Session dataShort-lived (90-minute default). Used for signing authorization
Transaction dataEvaluated against permissions policy server-side. Not stored after signing

Encryption

LayerImplementation
In transitTLS for all network communications. End-to-end encryption for sensitive data between client and Para servers
At restAll stored user data and key material is encrypted at rest
Key materialPara Share stored in cloud HSMs with hardware-level isolation. User Share protected by device secure enclave and passkey

Access Control and Permissions Enforcement

Para enforces a policy-based permissions system that provides an auditable control layer between applications and user wallets:
  • Every transaction is evaluated against an approved policy server-side before it reaches the MPC signing ceremony
  • Policies are immutable; changes require publishing a new version
  • DENY rules take precedence over ALLOW rules. Default posture is deny-all
  • Users explicitly consent to permission scopes during onboarding. No silent escalation
  • Each application gets its own policy per API key. Cross-app access is scoped independently
This creates a clear audit trail: what was requested, what policy was in effect, and whether the action was allowed or denied.

Non-Custodial Risk Model

For compliance teams evaluating what risks Para’s architecture eliminates vs. what remains in the integrating team’s scope:
RiskPara handlesApp handles
Private key storageKeys are split via MPC. Para holds one share in HSMs, users hold the other on-deviceN/A (neither party holds the full key)
Key compromise (single point)Eliminated. Compromising one share reveals nothing usefulEnsure applications don’t introduce vulnerabilities that expose the user’s session
PhishingPasskey-based auth is origin-bound and cannot be replayed on fake sitesEducate users on general phishing awareness
Unauthorized transactionsServer-side permissions enforcement blocks out-of-policy actionsDefine appropriate permission policies for your use case
Device lossRecovery via recovery secret, backup devices, and Para PortalEncourage users to set up 2FA and backup devices
Censorship / platform riskUsers can export their Para Share and sign independentlyN/A (users retain self-sovereignty)
Insider threat (Para)Para cannot produce valid signatures with only its shareMonitor your own internal access to API keys and Developer Portal
Regulatory classificationNon-custodial architecture avoids wallet-layer MSB/MTL obligationsConsult your own legal team for your specific jurisdiction and use case

Compliance FAQs

No. Para holds one share of a 2-of-2 MPC key pair. A valid signature requires both shares; Para’s share alone cannot produce a signature or move funds. Para has no access to the user’s recovery secret.
An attacker who compromises Para’s infrastructure gains access to Para Shares stored in HSMs. However, these shares alone cannot produce valid signatures. The attacker would also need the user’s share (stored on-device, protected by passkey/biometrics) to sign any transaction.
Users who have exported their Para Share (via Para Connect or the Para Backup Kit) can sign transactions independently without Para’s servers. Users who have not exported can wait for service restoration; their funds remain safe and inaccessible to any party.
Yes. Para is SOC 2 Type II compliant.
Yes. Contact the Para team at security@getpara.com to request audit reports and details.

Security & Trust Model

Full overview of Para’s security architecture

Key Management

MPC implementation, DKG, hardware secure enclaves