DAO vs DAO: The struggle of the shell and armor – Bits Media

On the example of the latest cases we deal with attacks within decentralized projects.

Introduction

Just the other day, the CFTC vs ooki case ended, Although in fact we are talking about continuing the struggle of the commission with BZX. There will be many more FUD publications on this wave, But obvious, that the attack on the crypto industry – well planned and resembles in many ways an attack 2014 and 2018 years: In 2014, the Central Bank of different countries released warning about the so-called danger of cryptocurrencies around the world, And in 2018, the peak of the Crusade began against ICO.

The difference of the current period is, that there are much more vectors: Here is Defi, и DAO, and NFT. But behind external threats, many ceased to notice the internal, And this led many to collapse and total errors. Which one? We’ll talk about this today.

Tornado Cash, or a real hurricane of malignation

Surely remember, that last year Andrei Pertsev, One of the founders of Tornado, fell under the gaze of the Western media, since he was arrested due to supposedly illegal activities, But in fact, due to the development of the OpenSource service, who works great without its creator (Explanation here). But that was just an external attack: much more interesting to consider then, What happened recently and became an attack inside the Tao itself.

So, General description:

• 20 May 2023 year an attacker with a fake vote (Similar to the previous one) seized power in the management of Tao: This was done with the help of a simple and completely documented function of the "emergency stop";
• 21 May 2023 a year comes out on Twitter with the analysis of this case;
• 26 May 2023 year, the community regains control of the management of Tao.

It would seem: which can happen less, than in a week? Actually a lot.

• First of all, This case once again confirmed fears, that voting is an outdated method of making collective decisions.
• Secondly, Previously described (Look at the first, second and third part on bits.media), What are similar, Destructive attacks are possible at the network level, but, As it turned out, Now tvl/Trejari of different Tao are such, that they are under the blow.
• Thirdly, It is extremely important to realize, that the approach "make fork" at this level does not work, And therefore, sooner or later, the projects will have to use innovative protection methods.

What can it be for methods? Consider for symmetry three:

And here is a quote, vividly indicating, that the problem described is far from isolated: 

“DAO attracted considerable attention and investment in the scope of cryptocurrencies, Moreover, some of them manage billions in their treasury. However, not all DAO participants have noble intentions. Some participants strive to manipulate the system, Slowing out funds from treasury without providing any appropriate value. Such participants are called invoices of money, They use various tactics and strategies, to deceive and manipulate other participants, administrators and delegates DAO. They often create sentences, which sound attractive, But they are vague, unrealistic or at high price (implementation)».

Undoubtedly, And this is not all, But let's try to go further, Having examined other examples.

Maker DAO, or another fatum

This is Tao, where is another Russian -speaking Founder under mysterious circumstances, and which at the same time was noted by a number of interesting and even bold statements of the founders. Today we will consider one of them, Since it directly concerns the research topic.

Perhaps, It became a trigger, and a catalyst for a new part, which literally means the following: "MakerDao votes on the proposal, which will require delegates to hide their identity and whereabouts ". Since cryptotermal rectum-analysis, how the famous smoke used, Delivered nowhere, That measure this justified. Moreover, it is fully consistent with the self -support of the Tao: Decentralized autonomous organization. That is everything, What are we doing together, open, But who exactly and how it does is already a big, big secret.

Interesting, how exactly this Tao wants to realize such an undertaking: 

“MakerDao will offer a reward for exposing to any member of the Tao, which can provide evidence, that the personality of the delegate was published ".

It is extremely important, that such an approach becomes significant, If we want to reach the level in the near future, when conspiracy between the holders of certain super-nodes, Whether it is the full nodes of some blockchain or votes in Tao, will Where less likely, than now. For Tao-networks, Such as Ethereum, This will bring more anti -tascenes, And for Tao less, the possibility of decentralized development.

Example. Not so long ago I launched the collection on Arbitrum Nova: did everything quickly - in six hours. Then our developer worked as a file and issued a full -fledged collection in an hour. But moderation in the new service (Marketplaise) She dragged on for weeks. Why? Because the first in line is their own. And these are problems not only a network or a specific application, but the industry in general (There are many similar examples in the Cosmos ecosystem, eg, and not just in EVM-chan) And therefore, When it comes to decentralized development, -These are not some dreams, But quite specific requests.

Moreover, Here is a quote from an independent researcher regarding the construction of a grant system in DAOS: 

«System, based on sentences, when depositors present their ideas for obtaining funds and subsequent achievement of the results, has become a standard model in many Tao. However, this approach can create an environment, contributing to unhealthy competition and transformation of Tao into toxic rat running In order to receive money, which negatively affects the general spirit and vision of decentralized organizations ".

therefore, for immersion in the abyss, I recommend visiting: start.makerdao.com, since Maker is one example, where creative did not give way (Another example is year ago), In the meantime, we will go further.

Arbitrator & Treasury, or battle for punishment

The Tao followed this before creating (since it was founded through iterative Retrodprop) And therefore, a number of questions concerned my personal financial well -being directly. Not so long ago in this community the following phrase sounded: 

“This is a symbolic gesture, demonstrating, that ultimately DAO is controlled by persons, Network managers, not a provider of ARBITRUM services or a fund ".

So what kind of symbolic gesture is meant? 

This is just about $1 000 000 000: As you understand, I speak in this case with intentional sarcasm. This is clearly visible in the conclusions, to which the community came:

“Tokens were unilaterally allocated to the fund… Dao, who were not approved by holders of managing tokens. Any funds should be returned until then, Until they are properly distributed DAO and only DAO ".

AND, Surprisingly, this is for the world history of past years, The return took place. What conclusions can be drawn on its basis:

• First of all, Community in Tao - this is Tao, And any mechanisms protection should take this into account.
• Secondly, Separation of Tao and a certain company, owing something from technology (Be it near foundation, Ethereum Foundation or Uniswap - it doesn't matter) inevitably, But it is the Tao who should be the owners of such assets as tokens.
• Thirdly, Treasury - not just a multi -one on 3-5-7-11-13 signatures, But this is exactly the general tool management and distributions.

Therefore, the victory of Tao in this case is more, than just victory. This is a precedent, Reverse BZX & Chopper, which I will talk about just below. In the meantime, I want to remember another case with Uniswap, where the community turned out to be a cut above themselves A16Z - One of the largest venture funds in the world.

I will not describe the plot, since he talked about her here. But one matters for articles of the point. If you study two sentences,

• Conditionally the first;
• Conventionally the second, 

then you can come to the conclusion, that one of the effective tools for protecting Tao is ... logics. I recommend to study for this, even though it is not easy, full layout of all arguments for each of the proposals. As a result, you can come to the conclusion, What is the community, when it is directly interested in the financial aspects of the work of the Tao, Quite thoroughly and in detail, And even scurrious, Studies everything for and against. Therefore, it is important not only the possession of the voting token, But the direct involvement of participants in the distribution of income.

This contradicts the conclusions above? No, Not at all: voting tokens should be separate, But income tokens - separately. But no one can ever cancel the correlations between them, And this must be understood, to build not just effective, But an effective and safe management model.

The opposite example is just the next.

bZx & OKI, Or unsuccessful grain

I will not repeat the plot: She is in official documents and translation. I only note the significant.

From this case began this article - it will be one of the final. Why is it so important? Here are a few reasons.

• First of all, There was no one -in -law: The hacking of the project occurred due to strict centralization.
• Secondly, made it clearly on the knee, Since the founders wanted to be in the USA, then a lot of expenses; They introduced innovations, then abruptly renounced them.
• Thirdly, No wonder the regulator chose them with a target: Consent was not found even between ordinary participants.

This example gave food for thought to many, And for me, the correctness of the following conclusions emphasized:

General conclusions

At first glance it may seem, that all the described problems are not worth the problem: “Well, some Tao suffered there, So what?»In fact, everything is much more complicated: Such attacks were discussed by mining, eg, in 2010-2013 years. And then there were also many doubts, But in the end, those who put on the utilitarian method won the dispute: Trust, But check. Remember the implemented attacks-51% on etc, BCH and other currencies not the third echelon; Forks of the same BSV due to the size of the block and the loss of GPU-mining after the transition of the Ethereum to POS. What unites them? All that were predicted attacks, which could be avoided as at the level of architecture, So is the work with the community.

therefore, If you want:

…then you better take care of solving the problems raised above in advance. Unless you are from black hats and want to earn extra money on it. But this is not to me anymore.

Therefore, I will complete the four questions today, answers to which determine the strategy of evolution and Tao in general (as a phenomenon), and Tao in specific implementation (How a project):

Of course, Each question can have its own subcovers, And those subsurities, But the essence of this will not change.

Synthesis technical and social attacks, And this is my basic forecast, more than seven years ago, will happen more and more, since the blockchain is a powerful technology, And she has been hung up for several years. Therefore, the consumer remains a weak link: In Tao, it should replace an active and advanced user in every sense, Otherwise the Kollaps gave inevitable.

I have everything on this and

To!