Draft : Proposal to help fundraiser participants who lost their seed phrase

Before anything I would like to extend my sincere thanks to @zaki , @slamper ,@sunnya97 , @katernoir & @JayB for answering questions along the way that helped me immensely to draft this proposal. This was a steep learning curve for me and if it weren’t for their support I would not have gotten far.

DRAFT : : A Proposal :
A humble request to the Community & Validators of the Cosmos Hub to help the fundraiser participants who have lost their seed.

*Please note that this proposal shall not be implemented until the next breaking change is required.
*i.e : There will be no breaking change for the sole purpose of helping the recovery of funds.

*As of the posting on May 27th 6.30 pm (UTC time) approximately Only 5% (of current supply) of the atoms from genesis accounts have not shown any activity (Excluding AIB and ICF funds) .

*Also it is highly possible that the eventual number to be recovered is Actually Less Than 5% because some participants may still have their seed , but have not broadcast a single transaction yet.

Section 1 : Bitcoin donors

Question1 : Who does this affect ?
Answer1 : It applies to

  1. Participants who contributed to the fundraiser using a Bitcoin transaction(s) , and
  2. have lost their 12 word seed, and
  3. have the ability to sign messages with the Bitcoin address(es) that were used to
    contribute to the fundraiser.

Question2 : What is this proposal ?
Answer2 : If a fundraiser participant satisfies all three pre-conditions from (Answer1), the validators will allow
for the lost atoms to be recovered to a cosmos address that is controlled by the fundraiser participant.

Question3 : May we have an example ?
Answer3 : Here is an example from the public Bitcoin blockchain.
https://btc4.trezor.io/address/1JQd4WSuTaVrGE7z8LiFJSHyYvMLS7Ce1y

    Explanation: 
    1. 35ty8iaSbWsj4YVkoHzs9pZMze6dapeoZ8 is the fundraiser contribution address. 
    
    2. 1JQd4WSuTaVrGE7z8LiFJSHyYvMLS7Ce1y is the intermediary address that was provided to the participant.
    
    3. Once the participant transferred their funds to the intermediary address , then there was another
    transaction that sent the funds from the intermediary address to the fundraiser contribution address. 

    4. The Participant used 4 address in this case to fund the intermediary address. 
      3PsXjWRJonBWWjWgVodfztnWskUBtEuC3q , 3ELQuVZ6AnDFWtJWB9GrSnUntRidgdNU5w,
      3BBhZfcXjgTwAbFtRKay8UZJ59PkMz9BA2  and 3EDeHiXpz2nNiqQC5kTCjnTBaFkC6cdQbH.
    
    5. The OP_RETURN value for the transaction from the intermediary address to the fundraiser contribution
      is be73ddf5f8f7aa58fb07a3395818d3116ff0043d.
    
    6. Using this tool https://slowli.github.io/bech32-buffer/ we can determine the public cosmos address 
       (i)   Select the Data Tab on the left
       (ii)  Enter "cosmos" in the Tag field. 
       (iii) Enter OP_RETURN value "be73ddf5f8f7aa58fb07a3395818d3116ff0043d" in the data field. 
       (iv)  Click the Encode Button 
       (v)   The public cosmos address "cosmos1heeama0c774937c85vu4sxxnz9hlqppa8lgdzc" is displayed. 
       (vi)  This public cosmos address can be verified to be a genesis atom holder on the block explorer


    7.If the Participant can sign any message that the Validators request them to with 
      any or all of the 4 addresses mentioned above in point (4) of (Answer3) then they 
      are eligible to have their atoms recovered and sent to an address under their control using the upgrade
      script in the next breaking change.

Section 2 : Ethereum Donors

Question1 : Who does this affect ?
Answer1 : It applies to

  1. Participants who contributed to the fundraiser using an Ethereum transaction, and
  2. have lost their 12 word seed, and
  3. have the ability to sign messages with the ethereum address that was used to contribute in
    the fundraiser

Question2 : What is this proposal ?
Answer2 : If a fundraiser participant satisfies all three pre-conditions from (Answer1), the validators will allow
for the lost atoms to be recovered to a cosmos address that is controlled by the fundraiser participant.

Question3 : May we have an example ?
Answer3. Here is an example from the public Ethereum Blockchain
https://etherscan.io/tx/0x9f63326afb29ac396a4e0ce4ccf8681d643dbe30e218fee6b4241ecc06a0ab24

    Explanation:
    1. 0xcf965cfe7c30323e9c9e41d4e398e2167506f764 is the fundraiser contribution smart contract. 
    
    2. The participant used 0xfaae1f6ce3d3108644c188555ae20e269f688c56 to donate eth to the contribution 
       smart contract address.
    
    3. In the Event log , under "Received" , the value of "returnAddr" which is of type "address" is 
       8666c62b94a90706580521b57c138c12e661c196 

    4. Using this tool https://slowli.github.io/bech32-buffer/ we can determine the public cosmos address
       (i)   Select the Data Tab on the left
       (ii)  Enter "cosmos" in the Tag field.
       (iii) Enter "returnAddr"  value "8666c62b94a90706580521b57c138c12e661c196" in the data field.
       (iv)  Click the Encode Button
       (v)   The public cosmos address "cosmos1senvv2u54yrsvkq9yx6hcyuvztnxrsvkuzdenh" is displayed.
       (vi)  This public cosmos address can be verified to be a genesis atom holder on the block explorer

    5. If the participant can sign any message that the Validators request them to with the address in (2)
       then they are eligible to have their atoms recovered and sent to an address under their control using
       the upgrade script in the next breaking change.

Section 3 : Saving old and new_recovery cosmos address via github submissions and using it in the upgrade script.

  1. Eligible bitcoin contributors in the fundraiser will submit a JSON message like so, to the github repo.
{  
         "fundraiser_txid":"e9060785ea3a26c348dbd7c31bccc9bc31150c2cf580c9cd57bb5e5405a0ab4f",
         "fundraiser_btc_deposit_address":"1JQd4WSuTaVrGE7z8LiFJSHyYvMLS7Ce1y",
         "fundraiser_btc_contrib_address":"3EDeHiXpz2nNiqQC5kTCjnTBaFkC6cdQbH",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_hex_address":"be73ddf5f8f7aa58fb07a3395818d3116ff0043d",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1heeama0c774937c85vu4sxxnz9hlqppa8lgdzc",
         "recovery_message":"Please move coins from cosmos1heeama0c774937c85vu4sxxnz9hlqppa8lgdzc  to cosmos1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ",
         "recovery_message_signed":"Placeholder  for recovery_proposal_message signed with fundraiser_btc_contrib_address",
         "recovery_cosmos_hex_address":"ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff",
         "recovery_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
 }
  1. Eligible ethereum contributors in the fundraiser will submit a JSON message like so, to the github repo.
{
  "fundraiser_txid": "0x9f63326afb29ac396a4e0ce4ccf8681d643dbe30e218fee6b4241ecc06a0ab24",
  "fundraiser_eth_deposit_address": "0xcf965cfe7c30323e9c9e41d4e398e2167506f764",
  "fundraiser_eth_contrib_address": "0xfaae1f6ce3d3108644c188555ae20e269f688c56",
  "fundraiser_cosmos_hex_address": "8666c62b94a90706580521b57c138c12e661c196",
  "fundraiser_cosmos_bech32_address": "cosmos1senvv2u54yrsvkq9yx6hcyuvztnxrsvkuzdenh",
  "recovery_message": "Please move coins from cosmos1senvv2u54yrsvkq9yx6hcyuvztnxrsvkuzdenh  to cosmos1yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ",
  "recovery_message_signed": "Placeholder for recovery_proposal_message signed with fundraiser_eth_contrib_address",
  "recovery_cosmos_hex_address":"eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee",
  "recovery_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy"
}
  1. The cumulative json file from submissions based on (1) and (2) will look like this .
    Please note that there may be more than one submission to bitcoin_donations or ethereum_donations.
{  
   "bitcoin_donations":[  
      {  
         "fundraiser_txid":"e9060785ea3a26c348dbd7c31bccc9bc31150c2cf580c9cd57bb5e5405a0ab4f",
         "fundraiser_btc_deposit_address":"1JQd4WSuTaVrGE7z8LiFJSHyYvMLS7Ce1y",
         "fundraiser_btc_contrib_address":"3EDeHiXpz2nNiqQC5kTCjnTBaFkC6cdQbH",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_hex_address":"be73ddf5f8f7aa58fb07a3395818d3116ff0043d",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1heeama0c774937c85vu4sxxnz9hlqppa8lgdzc",
         "recovery_message":"Please move coins from cosmos1heeama0c774937c85vu4sxxnz9hlqppa8lgdzc  to cosmos1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ",
         "recovery_message_signed":"Placeholder recovery_proposal_message signed with fundraiser_btc_contrib_address",
         "recovery_cosmos_hex_address":"ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff",
         "recovery_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx"
      }
   ],
   "ethereum_donations":[  
      {  
         "fundraiser_txid":"0x9f63326afb29ac396a4e0ce4ccf8681d643dbe30e218fee6b4241ecc06a0ab24",
         "fundraiser_eth_deposit_address":"0xcf965cfe7c30323e9c9e41d4e398e2167506f764",
         "fundraiser_eth_contrib_address":"0xfaae1f6ce3d3108644c188555ae20e269f688c56",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_hex_address":"8666c62b94a90706580521b57c138c12e661c196",
         "fundraiser_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1senvv2u54yrsvkq9yx6hcyuvztnxrsvkuzdenh",
         "recovery_message":"Please move coins from cosmos1senvv2u54yrsvkq9yx6hcyuvztnxrsvkuzdenh  to cosmos1yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ",
         "recovery_message_signed":"Placeholder for recovery_proposal_message signed with fundraiser_eth_contrib_address",
         "recovery_cosmos_hex_address":"eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee",
         "recovery_cosmos_bech32_address":"cosmos1yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy"
      }
   ]
}

  1. The upgrade script in contrib/export will contain code to
(i)  parse through the arrays from (3) .
(ii) Verify that recovery_proposal_message_signed is indeed signed by fundraiser_btc_contrib_address or fundraiser_eth_contrib_address.
(iii) Create a recovery dictionary  with  "old_cosmos_address" : "new_cosmos_address" as key-value pairs . 
(iv) Use the recovery dictionary from (ii) to replace old addreses with new addresses ( Example code in the gist below)
# ------------------------------------------------------------------
def recovery(accounts):
        #Format of each key-value pair  in the dictionary is "old_cosmos_address" :"new_cosmos_address".
        #This will be available and retrieved from data in submitted by the eligible fundraiser participants 
        #to recover lost genesis atoms int github.
        recoveryDict = dict({"cosmosaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa":"cosmosxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx",
                             "cosmosbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb":"cosmosyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy"})

        for x in accounts:
            if(int(x['account_number']) < 1026):
                if(x['address'] in recoveryDict):
                    temp = x['address']
                    x['address'] = recoveryDict.get(x['address'])
                    recoveryDict.pop(temp,None)
                    if(len(recoveryDict) == 0):
                        break
        return accounts
# -------------------------------------------------------------------
 genesis['app_state']['accounts'] = recovery(genesis['app_state']['accounts'])

#For reference a past upgrade script is present here :

https://github.com/cosmos/cosmos-sdk/blob/master/contrib/export/v0.33.x-to-v0.34.0.py

Section 5 : Funding this proposal.

This section is is a list people and or entities willing to fund this proposal .
This may include those who have lost their seed or , are doing it out of kindness.
The total number of Atoms required to fund this proposal is 512 Atoms.
Please note the proposal is still evolving and may change depending on feedback from the community and validators .

  1. @vee_em : 30 ATOM
  2. @katernoir : Representing StakingFacilities.com : 200 ATOM (Conditional)
    (i) 20% donation of recovered funds to the community pool
    (ii) One time proposal only , Recovery request window needs to be determined .
  3. @cryptic_monk : 100 ATOM
  4. cosmostation.io : 100 ATOM.

82 ATOMs more are required to fund this proposal.

Section 6 : For Eligible Participants

Please submit your public txid from the fundraiser in this forum and it will be added here .
The Json required can be computed from that . The message to be signed will be decided if and after the proposal passes.

Contributions

  1. eb5dd90216d8f9f7f5dcd3d54e4ad0b0dd34f5602d7b779b71ae338fc6586846 ( 1 BTC )
  2. 331db408685ff221193e88e0d548493920ab785e2d62f3898ce807463afc11e3 ( 0.4 BTC )
  3. 0xe2bb8c832c237b9ed898d4616649347e84931d56b8942cb409cafd6b01e1913d ( 24 ETH)
5 Likes

Thank you for all the work that went into this, @vee_em.

To this day, I can’t understand how I managed to loose my fundraiser seed. I followed Cosmos all along, even considered founding a company to become a Validator myself at one point. Logged on to vote for a validator when Mainnet launched, and … no seed. A painful moment.

Now there’s hope thanks to this proposal and thanks to me still being able to sign the Bitcoin address I used for donating to the fundraiser. I’d be truly happy if my fellow Cosmonauts (alas, in spirit only at the moment), and the Validators would help us use the flexibility of Cosmos to recover our Genesis coins.

1 Like

B-Harvest agrees with this proposal with condition that each receiver forcely donate X%(ex:30% in my opinion) of their salvation to the community fund. It will be a win-win for receiver, others, and entire community.

1 Like

I agree, such operation should not be performed without some kind of “penalty” that would beneficiate everyone

Hi Bharvest ,
Thank you for your comments .

I agree there needs to be a penalty for such a situation .
However 30% is too steep , In the US 30% donation would be seen as a disposition of assets and hence taxable by the Government . Anything over 14K$ would be subject to a "18% to 40% "tax on top of that.
And those like me who really want to stake as opposed to sell it would be drastically hurt by it .
.

I would suggest that 10% would be enough pain as penalty for the mistake we( fundraiser participants with lost seeds) have made. There will still be tax implications even after that which unfortunately cannot be avoided.

X% is a matter of discussion and I think it can be lower than 30%.(depending on the result of community discussion) We agree any result between 10%~30%.

Governance will forcely send the X% amount to community on the new genesis file, meaning that it is not the holder’s choice, therefore it is technically not a donation. Not sure how US tax law works though.

And I dont see X% as a punishment, but rather see it as a proper economic/community-wise incentive for voters to agree the proposal.

2 Likes

Agreed. It is true. It is in fact an incentive for the greater good of the community.
Bharvest and the other Validators can agree collectively on what that rate would eventually be .

The tax law in the US, unfortunately is very complicated :frowning: .
In the US forced repossession of assets are also subject to tax if the value of the asset has appreciated. A donation of 10% in the US would have a maximum effective of 4% on top of that as tax to the govt . So the effective rate would be at max 14% .

I’ll happily donate to the community fund in return for the recovery. 10% would appear fairer, but I’m probably a bit biased.

1 Like

I would suggest no less than 20%. Also this should not indeed be seen only as a penalty but also as a reward/incentive for the cosmos community to perform such operation.

Also such refunding would be quite unprecedented afaik. It could be perceived as something positive (i.e thanks to proper governance such operation is possible) but also negative (i e. it would send the signal that losing your seed is not such a great deal)

Regarding taxation : if the x% sent to community pool are considered as a donation, then it is the entity controlling the community pool that would be subject to taxation, not the donator, and most probably this would happen only when convertings atoms to fiat as most countries tax only crypto to fiat trades. By the way, who controls the community pool ? Is it the ICF ?

1 Like

Cosmostation supports this governance proposal.

Our backend developer JayB gave vee_em some feedback in the process of putting this proposal together in terms of ways to imagine recovery of these funds.

Like @bharvest mentioned, it might be fair to have a portion of the recovered funds to be accumulated in the community fund. Applying this proposal on our next upgrade to cosmoshub-3 requires some effort and participation from the validators. Since this is a governance proposal and and the result of the proposal is in the hands of validators and delegators, there would inevitably be some demand for taxation or should I say “community-wise incentive,” and rightfully so.

I do think however that a 30% taxation may be a little too steep. @ddrdrck mentioned that such refunding could be viewed as both positive and negative, and I completely agree with this viewpoint.

If we were to apply some taxation to recovery of these funds, I think that 10%~15% would be a fair number.

Would like to hear what others have to say.

2 Likes

Community fund only can be controlled by governance, not any single entity. So the actual possession belongs to entire atom holders imo.

I have to be honest: When I started talking to @vee_em and first heard about this idea, I was very much against it for various reasons. Is someone who has control of the donation address always the owner of the corresponding Cosmos address? What if the bitcoin private key was stolen in the meantime?
After talking to @vee_em vee_em for a while and thinking about this, I see it a bit differently.

Looking at the governance part of the cosmos whitepaper, it describes a human-readable constitution that governs the policies of the Cosmos hub. From my understanding, we don’t have that written down yet (which I think we should, maybe it’s time for another proposal…), but the way I experienced the Cosmos community over the last year, we are a welcoming community that cares about its members and always tries to help out. On-chain governance is a tool for us to form the blockchain-ecosystem in a way we want it to be. For me, that means that “code isn’t law” and that mistakes don’t have to be fatal. In this particular case, recovering funds doesn’t hurt anyone. We don’t dilute the supply (the ATOM are there, just not accessible) and we don’t take away ATOM from anyone. Therefore, Staking Facilities is for this proposal and will support it.
That being said, we have to consider several factors / conditions:

First of all, this should be a one-time chance for fundraiser participants. The proposal should include a time window in which affected participants can submit their request. If that time passes, there will be NO other chance to do this. The time window should consider enough time for several independent parties to verify the information before it is merged into the next chain upgrade.

Second, this process requires time and effort from multiple parties, which the affected participants should pay for. In my opinion, the suggestion to require an X% donation to the community pool sounds fair. I wouldn’t see this as a penalty, but rather as reimbursement for the communities effort. I believe that 20% would be a reasonable fee.

If those conditions are agreed upon and no other convincing arguments against this proposal arise, Staking Facilities will not only vote for this proposal, but we would also be ready to commit 200 ATOM for the proposal deposit.

2 Likes

Thank you for the comments @katernoir
I appreciate all the very important inputs you had throughout this process.
I will create another section determining time and process of submission of a recovery request.
In the meantime , this proposal needs to reach as many of the genesis account holders as possible so that they do not miss this window. I will request the admin of the cosmos medium page to begin with and other official channels as well.

I also thank StakingFacilities.com for their very kind gesture of committing 200 ATOM for this proposal.
I have updated Section 5 , with this detail along with the conditions specified by you .

While I am extremely sorry for those that lost their fundraiser seed, I must speak strongly against this proposal.

The main reason why I am against it is because it is exploitable. There is a chance that some users in the 5% that have not send a transaction yet may see their ATOMs be stolen from them. If their Bitcoin or Ethereum private key were compromised, this proposal would effectively enable the hackers to seize their ATOMs as well. I think that while unlikely, the fact that this possibility exists should disqualify the proposal immediately.

Additionally, this proposal opens the possibility for malicious actors to attack the reputation of the network. All they need to perform the attack is to collude with one of the users that have not sent a transaction yet. Here is how the attack could unfold:

  • Alice is in the 5% of users that have not sent a transaction yet. Alice possesses both the bitcoin private key she used in the fundraiser and the fundraiser seed. She decides to collude with Bob to perform the attack.
  • Alice gives her BITCOIN private key to her friend Bob. Then, she and Bob both short the ATOM market. Then, Bob performs the recovery procedure in this proposal and transfers Alice ATOMs to his own address, and sells them all on the open market.
  • Alice starts the reputation attack a few days/weeks after. She publicly says she lost her Bitcoin private key a while back, but not her ATOM fundraiser seed. She proves she owns the fundraiser seed, and starts to speak out in every community channel asking where her ATOMs are.
  • If she and Bob are clever enough, they can start a coordinated FUD campaign on the Cosmos network claiming the community allowed for an exploitable proposal to be implemented, and resulted in her losing her funds.
  • ATOM price tanks, Alice and Bob profit.

Of course, there is a high likelihood that no such attack would occur, but do we really want to take the risk? This would be a major hit for our community. What I’m getting at is: do we want to take the risk of implementing an exploitable proposal to help a few people? Are there no other ways?

My last point would be this: what kind of precedent would such a proposal set? We have many examples of communities being torn apart by “fund recovery proposals”. The latest example is the Parity Multisig hack. The Ethereum community said no to the proposal, even though:

  • The proposal was NOT exploitable, whereas the one at hand is.
  • Many more people and projects were involved. The value was much more significant.

Again, I am very sorry for the individuals that lost their fundraiser seed, but I would not risk the cohesion of our community and the reputation of our network over it. Maybe we can find an other way, but I sure hope it does not involve any possibility of exploit.

@gamarin indeed if this proposal was accepted it would create a precedent, however I do not think this is comparable to Parity multisig hack or DAO hack (the most famous examples coming to mind). In both cases, a real hack occured, and people could argue that as “code is law”, it was up to the smart contract coder to make sure there was no flaw with his code. In this case no hack happened

Also the “exploit” you describe is not a technical exploit but a social exploit, consisting in spreading FUD to influence the market. In my opinion it would be easy to dismiss such FUD if it would ever happen. In any case, I would not say the proposal is “exploitable” based on this sole argument.

however I do not think this is comparable to Parity multisig hack or DAO hack (the most famous examples coming to mind). In both cases, a real hack occured, and people could argue that as “code is law”, it was up to the smart contract coder to make sure there was no flaw with his code. In this case no hack happened

To me the point is not really about why people lost money though. The point is that we are asking to change the code of the Hub via a method that can be exploited in order to recover some lost funds. “Code is law” is not our tagline, I am just mentioning these hacks because they show how controversial recovery proposals can affect a community, as well as the reputation of this community to the general blockchain ecosystem.

Also the “exploit” you describe is not a technical exploit but a social exploit, consisting in spreading FUD to influence the market. In my opinion it would be easy to dismiss such FUD if it would ever happen. In any case, I would not say the proposal is “exploitable” based on this sole argument.

I never said it was a technical exploit, just that it was a possible exploit scenario (social, yes). But there is a clear exploit that I mentioned above (if the user’s bitcoin private key is compromised), which makes the proposal exploitable by definition.

Also there would be no way to dismiss such FUD (how could you?), and even if we could get the cosmos community not to care, I’m sure the general blockchain community would see this in a bad light.

TL;DR we should never touch account balances and break economic finality.

I truely sympathize and applaud the effort put into draft, but am against the proposal:

  1. If this vote passes and we start messing with account balances, it breaks the Hub guarantees of economic finality. I can’t stress how important that is, if we want real world adoption with real value flowing through the Hub. It requires certainty that your account balance doesn’t suddenly change because some Atom holders you never met decided so. Changing that guarantee will likely be even more damaging than the coordinated FUD campaign/sell-off scenario @gamarin outlined.

  2. There are no guarantees that all fundraiser participants who lost their seed phrase have discovered this yet and will turn up before the deadline. Is it fair to reimburse only some? Recall there was a window before launch where the genesis was public and tools were available to verify balances before launch.

Depending on what amounts we are dealing with, an alternative proposal could be to use a similar scheme as the fat-finger refund.

  1. Fundraiser participants file a claim along with their public verified identity (so they have reputation at risk).

  2. Claim is paid out from community pool or ICF funds.

  3. If fundraiser wallet is ever touched, claimant reputation will suffer and/or there could be legal ramifications if some kind of contract is entered into as part of the claim.

Second alternative could be donations from friendly hodlers.

As a side note to economic finality, this is also why I am against account pruning (accounts below certain value getting destroyed). IMHO there are better mechanisms to avoid account spamming or dust, we should never change change account balances in unexpected ways.

1 Like

I am in favor of this proposal. This proposal does not affect me financially, but I’m in favor of it because I believe it provides a way for a small handful of unfortunate Cosmos participants who saw the early value in this network / community and contributed their own funds, to continue to participate with Cosmos Atoms they rightfully own.

  1. This proposal does not affect economic finality for your account if you don’t sign a transaction with your Bitcoin or Ethereum keys that were used to fund the original crowdsale.

  2. Social engineering exploits are possible in any decentralized consensus network. That’s the world we choose to operate within when putting value at stake in this space.

I cannot speak as a voice for the community, but my strong opinion in this matter is that the Cosmos / Tendermint project is about connecting blockchains and promoting interoperability between chains. If we as a community can’t work towards enabling a simple interaction between Ethereum, Bitcoin and Cosmos Hub to address a limited use case to help founding members of our own community who are rightful Atom owners, then I’m not sure this community will have the cohesiveness to survive real challenges to upcoming interoperability and consensus challenges in the future.

There may indeed need to be changes to the proposal as it stands. I can see that a percentage donation back to the community is probably a fair assessment and am in favor of a change like that if the community sees fit.

Let’s provide a path for every rightful Atom owner, especially early adopters, to participate in the network fairly and securely. This proposal is a great start.

2 Likes

Below is a Tx hash of a person who inquired Cosmostation about his lost mnemonics.

TxHash: eb5dd90216d8f9f7f5dcd3d54e4ad0b0dd34f5602d7b779b71ae338fc6586846

FROM: 1PGUzrmXSVhSY6jUtrVTmp3y5nQ3XbBfd7

Amount: 1BTC

Here is my TX info:

TxHash: 331db408685ff221193e88e0d548493920ab785e2d62f3898ce807463afc11e3

FROM: 1JsiFGmKZvr3iR4KejpMswmapCoB2oWsog, 1E1dPcQwyPBxYRUfYBt64BpZnvsgSam6SS

Amount: 0.4BTC