Check placement determines which risks can be observed. Startup checks and transaction-time evaluation have different freshness and performance costs.
Evaluation approach
Startup checks can identify early risk. Checks close to an operation provide newer information but may add visible latency. Avoid redundant repetition.
Application example
Model adding a recipient, registering a key and transferring funds as separate checkpoints. Measure each latency budget.
Limits and considerations
Increasing check frequency does not improve security linearly and can increase battery and stability costs.
Place effort near consequential actions
Heavy checks on every call can hurt performance, while startup-only checks can miss later changes. Select check type, operation impact and result lifetime together.
Returning from the background, switching accounts and high-impact actions may warrant reassessment. An unfinished check must not count as success. Report security coverage and latency budgets in the same evaluation.
Checks and decisions
- Select critical steps
- Measure signal age
- Record check overhead
Choose timing according to transaction risk and measured cost.
Sources
The primary references above provide the technical basis. Example workflows and evaluation suggestions are this publication’s explanations, not independent test results for a particular product.