Tl;dr
Optimistic snapshot execution (oSnap) has been turned on for Across governance
This will allow anyone at all to execute transactions for Across on-chain, but only after they have passed a snapshot vote and any rules specified in the oSnap parameters.
This puts the power to execute governance results squarely in the hands of the community, with a 1-of-n security model that only requires a single honest person to dispute an incorrect proposal.
In case you missed it — the engineers at UMA have launched a new optimistic governance tool called oSnap. It allows you to execute your Snapshot votes on-chain using your Safe, but without the multi-sig. It’s a really elegant way to decentralize governance using the tools already in your tool belt. In fact, we think it’s so cool that we’re one of the first ones to use it.
What has Across governance looked like before today?
ACX holders today are able to vote on three types of proposals — updates to governance, committee creation, and treasury expenditures. Typically, an idea starts out in Discord or on Forum. Once it gains enough traction, it’ll get properly formatted according to our Governance Operating Manual and posted as a proposal for feedback on Forum. A current example of this is a “Community Owned Liquidity” funding request. After the author has received their feedback and made any changes, they can move forward with a vote on Snapshot. Snapshot votes are open for 7 days and must reach a quorum of 6M with a 51% approval threshold (some require a higher threshold). If a proposal passes, it will be executed by the Across Council — which is the set of Risk Labs signers currently tasked with honoring the results of our Snapshot votes. Once 3 of 5 Council members have signed off on the transaction, funds get sent to the recipient address.
Let’s take a quick pause right here. We realize the irony of this situation. Before we go on to tell you about how we’re upgrading this system because multi-sigs are bad for DeFi… let me take a moment to reassure you that lots of DAOs start out like this. On-chain voting can still be clunky and expensive for DAOs to implement, and exclude stakeholders who cannot easily afford the gas cost to vote. At the time of writing, a simple transaction can cost upwards of $50 in gas! It also takes time and iteration to iron out a system of operations for any new company. All of this is to say that there’s no shame in this progression - it’s the accepted path for most DAOs. We’ve all placed belief in a multi-sig at one time or another, and we also think this industry can do better. So when I tell you that the Across Council is a trustworthy group of folks, I want you to believe me. But more importantly, you shouldn’t have to.
The future of Across Governance
Across Governance just recently acquired the ability to delegate specific responsibilities to committees, such as community growth and financial engineering. In the not-so-distant future, it will also control approval for protocol upgrades such as deployments to new chains. Every idea that survives the governance process will be implemented by any member of the DAO from the Snapshot interface, and any dubious attempt to bypass the system can be stopped by anyone worldwide.
We’re able to accomplish this ideal scenario because of the flexibility of oSnap. It lets you set updatable and human-readable rules on-chain, and it offers a bounty for anyone to detect an inconsistency, error, or attack. There are some basics that you must input when you deploy, such as quorum and liveness period, but we’re taking it to the next level with Across and planning to implement some really custom features.
Customizing Across’ Governance
Flexible Quorum
Recent votes had revealed to us that we needed to update our quorum to a more sustainable level. This provided us an opportunity to create a more granular system through which different types of proposals could follow different rules. Across now uses oSnap to set custom quorum rules for different proposal types. To read more on the way we’ll implement them, see this passed proposal.
Contract Exclusions
Another way we’re customizing our oSnap implementation is with the exclusion of specific contracts from optimistic execution during an initial trial period. This measure will prevent anyone from attempting changes to the protocol itself until these exclusions are removed. While not strictly necessary, it’s a security measure we can take in the short term to give peace of mind during the transition to optimistic governance.
Safety first
In addition to the customizations listed above, there are a number of other safety measures offered to us by oSnap that we plan to lean on.
To start, we’ll be setting our liveness period to 3 days. This means that after a vote passes Snapshot and is proposed for execution, there is a 3-day window of opportunity for it to be disputed. Historically, nearly all disputes happen within an hour or two of when a proposal is made, so this gives us an extensive opportunity to catch any bad proposals.
On top of that, there are several resources that we’ll be using to monitor these events. Every proposal to UMA comes through their oracle, which is monitored 24/7 by humans and bots alike. The same information is pushed to the UMA Discord, where fact checkers are constantly reviewing proposals. Additionally, we’ve set up bots to report in the Across Discord and to the Risk Labs team each time a new proposal goes live in our Snapshot space. These same bots will report when a transaction is proposed to oSnap.
Governance in Service of Longtermism
Across has always been dedicated to building things the right way, the first time around. We appreciate the opportunity that being alive today offers us: to build something beautiful on-chain that can be used forever. We also believe that the governing bodies that support the protocol need to be set up to last forever. Implementing oSnap in this way is a big step in that direction. You can see Across’ deployment of oSnap here.
Across Protocol is an intents-based interoperability protocol, capable of filling and settling cross-chain intents. It is made up of the Across Bridge, a powerfully efficient cross-chain transfer tool for end users, Across+, a chain abstraction tool that utilizes cross-chain bridge hooks to fulfill user intents and Across Settlement, a settlement layer for all cross-chain intent order flow. As the multichain economy continues to evolve, intents-based settlement is the key to solving interoperability and Across is at the core of its execution.
Website | Forum | Discord | Twitter | YouTube | Docs | Github
