Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship | proposals.app

posted 2 years ago

The proposal for the Ethereum Protocol Attackathon, while ambitious in its goal to enhance Ethereum's security, raises several points of discussion regarding the clarity and justification of its funding structure:

Funding Transparency: The proposal outlines a goal to raise over $2 million, with an initial $500,000 from the Ethereum Foundation. However, it lacks detailed comparisons with similar initiatives or past events within or outside the Ethereum ecosystem. This absence makes it challenging to gauge whether the proposed amounts are commensurate with the event's scope or industry standards.
Comparative Analysis: There's a noticeable gap in providing benchmarks against which the community can evaluate the funding request. While the initiative's importance for Ethereum's security is acknowledged, understanding how this investment stacks up against previous security audits or similar events in other blockchains would provide a clearer perspective on its value proposition.
Community Engagement and Trust: For initiatives within decentralized ecosystems like Ethereum, trust and transparency are paramount. The lack of detailed financial justification might lead to skepticism or questions about the efficiency of resource allocation, potentially affecting community trust and engagement.
Proposal Enhancement: To address these concerns, the proposers could consider:

Funding Transparency: The proposal outlines a goal to raise over $2 million, with an initial $500,000 from the Ethereum Foundation. However, it lacks detailed comparisons with similar initiatives or past events within or outside the Ethereum ecosystem. This absence makes it challenging to gauge whether the proposed amounts are commensurate with the event's scope or industry standards.
Comparative Analysis: There's a noticeable gap in providing benchmarks against which the community can evaluate the funding request. While the initiative's importance for Ethereum's security is acknowledged, understanding how this investment stacks up against previous security audits or similar events in other blockchains would provide a clearer perspective on its value proposition.
Community Engagement and Trust: For initiatives within decentralized ecosystems like Ethereum, trust and transparency are paramount. The lack of detailed financial justification might lead to skepticism or questions about the efficiency of resource allocation, potentially affecting community trust and engagement.
Proposal Enhancement: To address these concerns, the proposers could consider:

Detailed Financial Justification: Provide a breakdown of how the funding amount was calculated, including comparisons with past security audits or similar events in other blockchain ecosystems.
Outcome Metrics: Outline expected outcomes in relation to the investment, possibly including metrics like the anticipated number of vulnerabilities found, or improvements in code security.
Community Feedback Loop: Establish mechanisms for ongoing community input on the funding and outcomes, ensuring the initiative remains aligned with community expectations.

In conclusion, while the intent behind the Attackathon is commendable, enhancing its proposal with clearer financial transparency and comparative data could significantly bolster community support and trust. This approach would not only justify the investment but also set a precedent for future funding proposals within the Ethereum community.

kinaArb

posted 2 years ago

Funding Transparency: The proposal outlines a goal to raise over $2 million, with an initial $500,000 from the Ethereum Foundation. However, it lacks detailed comparisons with similar initiatives or past events within or outside the Ethereum ecosystem. This absence makes it challenging to gauge whether the proposed amounts are commensurate with the event's scope or industry standards.
Comparative Analysis: There's a noticeable gap in providing benchmarks against which the community can evaluate the funding request. While the initiative's importance for Ethereum's security is acknowledged, understanding how this investment stacks up against previous security audits or similar events in other blockchains would provide a clearer perspective on its value proposition.
Community Engagement and Trust: For initiatives within decentralized ecosystems like Ethereum, trust and transparency are paramount. The lack of detailed financial justification might lead to skepticism or questions about the efficiency of resource allocation, potentially affecting community trust and engagement.
Proposal Enhancement: To address these concerns, the proposers could consider:

Funding Transparency: The proposal outlines a goal to raise over $2 million, with an initial $500,000 from the Ethereum Foundation. However, it lacks detailed comparisons with similar initiatives or past events within or outside the Ethereum ecosystem. This absence makes it challenging to gauge whether the proposed amounts are commensurate with the event's scope or industry standards.
Comparative Analysis: There's a noticeable gap in providing benchmarks against which the community can evaluate the funding request. While the initiative's importance for Ethereum's security is acknowledged, understanding how this investment stacks up against previous security audits or similar events in other blockchains would provide a clearer perspective on its value proposition.
Community Engagement and Trust: For initiatives within decentralized ecosystems like Ethereum, trust and transparency are paramount. The lack of detailed financial justification might lead to skepticism or questions about the efficiency of resource allocation, potentially affecting community trust and engagement.
Proposal Enhancement: To address these concerns, the proposers could consider:

Detailed Financial Justification: Provide a breakdown of how the funding amount was calculated, including comparisons with past security audits or similar events in other blockchain ecosystems.
Outcome Metrics: Outline expected outcomes in relation to the investment, possibly including metrics like the anticipated number of vulnerabilities found, or improvements in code security.
Community Feedback Loop: Establish mechanisms for ongoing community input on the funding and outcomes, ensuring the initiative remains aligned with community expectations.

rodrigolvc

posted 2 years ago

Hi Castle Capital,

Thank you for sharing your concerns and for the opportunity to clarify the proposal further. 100% of the funds will be paid out to security researchers for bug reports. If there are any leftover funds they will be rolled over to an audit contest covering the Pecta hardfork.

Hi Castle Capital,

Tangible Benefits to Arbitrum: I understand the need for clear, tangible benefits to Arbitrum and the DAO. The primary benefit lies in enhancing Ethereum’s security, which directly impacts Arbitrum. A more secure Ethereum means a more secure Arbitrum, reducing potential risks that could affect the entire ecosystem. Specifically, since Arbitrum’s execution client, Nitro, is based on Geth, any bug in Geth is likely to also be present in Nitro. This makes it crucial for Arbitrum to support initiatives that strengthen the security of the Ethereum protocol, as it directly contributes to the stability and security of Arbitrum’s infrastructure. Additionally, Arbitrum will benefit from the free Immunefi Boost, a targeted audit contest that further strengthens Arbitrum’s own security framework.
Breakdown of Expenditures: All of the funds raised from the Ethereum Foundation and other sponsors, will be directed towards payouts for security researchers who identify vulnerabilities. These rewards will be structured based on the severity of the bugs found, ensuring that critical issues are appropriately incentivized and addressed. It’s also worth noting that Immunefi is forgoing their usual fees for this event, allowing all funds to be allocated directly to researcher payouts. Additionally, the educational components of the Attackathon are a collaborative effort between Immunefi, client teams, and the Ethereum Foundation, none of whom are charging for their contributions. In the event that there are any unused funds after the Attackathon, they will be rolled over to support an audit contest focused on the Pectra fork, further contributing to the security of the Ethereum and Arbitrum ecosystems.
Sponsorship Transparency: I appreciate the need for transparency regarding sponsorship. We have already confirmed sponsorships from Wormhole, GMX, and the Blockchain for Good Alliance. We have also submitted proposals to the Uniswap DAO and are preparing to submit a second proposal to the Gnosis DAO. These partnerships and proposals align with the strategic vision of building a strong coalition dedicated to enhancing the security of Ethereum, and by extension, the security of all connected ecosystems, including Arbitrum.

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback, and we look forward to continuing this conversation.

rodrigolvc

posted 2 years ago

Hi Castle Capital,

Tangible Benefits to Arbitrum: I understand the need for clear, tangible benefits to Arbitrum and the DAO. The primary benefit lies in enhancing Ethereum’s security, which directly impacts Arbitrum. A more secure Ethereum means a more secure Arbitrum, reducing potential risks that could affect the entire ecosystem. Specifically, since Arbitrum’s execution client, Nitro, is based on Geth, any bug in Geth is likely to also be present in Nitro. This makes it crucial for Arbitrum to support initiatives that strengthen the security of the Ethereum protocol, as it directly contributes to the stability and security of Arbitrum’s infrastructure. Additionally, Arbitrum will benefit from the free Immunefi Boost, a targeted audit contest that further strengthens Arbitrum’s own security framework.
Breakdown of Expenditures: All of the funds raised from the Ethereum Foundation and other sponsors, will be directed towards payouts for security researchers who identify vulnerabilities. These rewards will be structured based on the severity of the bugs found, ensuring that critical issues are appropriately incentivized and addressed. It’s also worth noting that Immunefi is forgoing their usual fees for this event, allowing all funds to be allocated directly to researcher payouts. Additionally, the educational components of the Attackathon are a collaborative effort between Immunefi, client teams, and the Ethereum Foundation, none of whom are charging for their contributions. In the event that there are any unused funds after the Attackathon, they will be rolled over to support an audit contest focused on the Pectra fork, further contributing to the security of the Ethereum and Arbitrum ecosystems.
Sponsorship Transparency: I appreciate the need for transparency regarding sponsorship. We have already confirmed sponsorships from Wormhole, GMX, and the Blockchain for Good Alliance. We have also submitted proposals to the Uniswap DAO and are preparing to submit a second proposal to the Gnosis DAO. These partnerships and proposals align with the strategic vision of building a strong coalition dedicated to enhancing the security of Ethereum, and by extension, the security of all connected ecosystems, including Arbitrum.

Thank you for your thoughtful feedback, and we look forward to continuing this conversation.

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Non-Constitutional

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Key Terms

Specifications

Steps to Implement

Estimated Timeline

Overall Cost

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Non-Constitutional

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Key Terms

Specifications

Steps to Implement

Estimated Timeline

Overall Cost

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Non-Constitutional

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Key Terms

Specifications

Steps to Implement

Estimated Timeline

Overall Cost

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Non-Constitutional

Abstract

Motivation

Rationale

Key Terms

Specifications

Steps to Implement

Estimated Timeline

Overall Cost

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Ethereum Protocol Attackathon Sponsorship

Rationale

Rationale

Rationale

Rationale

Rationale

Rationale