A little bit of chit-chat
A proposal to onboard UST, Terra’s stable coin, to Aave has passed with 100% of the votes. UST will be available on the Aave platform through Wormhole, which will add a USTw token. The proposal was attractive to the Aave ecosystem because UST is used by major Ethereum and Terra dApps including Curve, Uniswap, Sushi, Mirror, and Anchor.
Persistence, a Layer-1 network providing liquid staking, has entered the Cosmos after launching on IBC. Since March 8th, holders of the ERC-20 $PSTAKE token can transfer their assets through the Persistence bridge. The Persistence bridge is unidirectional - you can only send ERC-20 tokens to the Persistence Core-1 chain and not the other way around. Users can provide liquidity to Osmosis pool #648 ($PSTAKE/ $OSMO).
Remember we are hosting Privacy in Cosmos, Live in Amsterdam on April 15th, an IRL event in which we will delve deeper into the Cosmos ecosystem and the role that privacy and zk tech is playing in pushing the network forward. Make sure you save your spot as attendance will be limited. Get your free tickets here.
Where does the $ go? 😶
A discussion around the allocation of community funds by the Osmosis team arose on Reddit. According to the post, Osmosis spends $200,000 worth of OSMO per month on support personnel, mainly marketing and community engagement.
The argument in the post, which the author said was published as constructive feedback, is that such a large amount of money is not sustainable for a decentralised network, given the selling pressure it creates. Moreover, the author argued that the added value the community receives from this investment is not worth it.
Other community members responded that the whole amount budgeted for the current quarter ~109,000 OSMO was produced in just 3 days through newly minted tokens going to the Treasury. Currently, the community pool has 43,562,400 OSMO, which means the entire amount for the full 3 months is just 0.25% of the pool.
To solve the argument, it was proposed that an audit team should ensure the funds are used as specified.
Airdrop flop? 🩸
Tension is building in the Juno community with voting live for proposal #16. The proposal, which is open for voting until March 15th, is trying to confiscate 3,067,631 JUNO from a wallet, where the key holder is accused of having gamed the genesis stakedrop.
If the proposal passes, Juno would be upgraded and the confiscated funds handed over to the community pool leaving the wallet in question with 50,000 JUNO - the ‘fair share’ airdrop amount. The proposal has also raised questions as to whether the unbonding period should be shorter than a proposal voting period, as this would demonstrate governance has the power to confiscate staked tokens.
Those in favour of the proposal argue that the 50,000 JUNO limit should be for each entity or individual and not per wallet address. Moreover, they argue, the amount of JUNO held by a single wallet poses a risk for on-chain governance through voting power and the potential for bribery. The community also fears bad behaviour, with a single entity controlling a significant amount of JUNO liquidity. Wolfcontract, core contributor to Juno, claimed that the whale’s identity is linked to Game validator - a validator who’s stakers had been ineligible for the Lum and Bitsong airdrops.
Arguments to vote against the proposal include research by Joe Abbey suggesting the entity had been using multiple wallets long before the airdrop was announced, and therefore was not actively gaming the system.
On-chain data from as far back as May 2020, before the Juno stakedrop was announced, shows that wallet addresses linked to the whale were loaded with 100,000 ATOM and the ATOM was staked to validators connected to GAME validator. This process was repeated for more than 50 wallets, which could have been a security precaution. The community also noticed some retroactive changes to airdrop communication. The medium post explaining eligibility for the airdrop was modified from the original to add in that the 50k ATOM cap was ‘per person or entity’, which was previously omitted.
In the words of Sunny Aggarwal, co-founder of Osmosis, if you don't want people to sybil your airdrops, then don't make sybillable airdrops. Whatever the outcome of the vote, it is impressive to see such an engaged community with 77% turnout, at the time of writing with 67% voting yes.
You Only Launch Twice? 🤷
A security vulnerability pushed the Evmos team to deploy an emergency update that ended with forcing them to shut down the network for an undefined period.
Evmos released a detailed postmortem with the ins and outs of the events that happened since March 4th when Interchain GmbH notified Evmos of the vulnerability.
The vulnerability allowed anyone to claim other people’s airdrops through IBC while a bug made the EVM module unable to convert ERC20 tokens to Cosmos coins. Moreover, Ledger users experienced major issues such as not being able to claim their airdrops. Those using the Keplr ledger integration with Evmos got their funds locked due to incompatible ETH and Cosmos key types.
According to Federico Kunze Küllmer, cofounder of Evmos, during the community call hosted on March 8th, they are still working on a solution but a decision has not yet been made as to whether Evmos should restart or resume the chain. One of the questions that arose during the community call was if staking rewards were going to be kept, to which Evmos team answered that there is still not a decision made in this regard.
Airdrops List
Surprisingly enough, there are no important airdrops coming up this week.
Wrap Up
This coming Tuesday, we will host the last event of this edition of the ZK Hack Mini In collaboration with the Zero Knowledge Podcast. In this session, we will have a panel on ZK Tech with Kobi Gurkan, Tarun Chitra and Pratyush Mishra. You can sign up here.
In the meantime, feel free to follow us on Twitter @zkvalidator and visit our website to stake with us.