KVORUM
lidoSource: Snapshot · #0x3fdb38cc13abdfccf9978a27b74de7a47d52663c952bc6d8c4b8881442610fa3

Proposal to return back 11 ETH that were sent by BloXroute's builder to Lido Execution Layer Rewards Vault

succeededOct 14, 2022, 05:00 PM UTCsignaling · non-bindingbyDB0xdbbc…1cb6View on Snapshot ↗

01Summary

AISummary by Kvorum

An AI summary is not generated yet. Read the description →

02Description

259 words

Overview

Over the course of the day on 09/27 the BloXroute ethical relay was receiving and returning bad blocks to validators from one of our block builders running an experimental build strategy that resulted in missed slots.

This builder was improperly committing transactions and caused improperly formatted blocks. Because the relay was not simulating blocks from known builders these blocks were getting sent to validators causing them to miss slots due to proposing blocks with improper receipts or log blooms. A total of 15 slots were missed due to this issue.

BloXroute’s relay was not simulating blocks from internal builders and was instead relying on these builders to submit valid blocks.

This was resolved:

  • The experimental builder was taken offline and ensured that it was no longer submitting blocks to any of our relays.
  • All of the validators who missed slot’s were paid for the bids they received from the bloXroute relay.
  • On 09/30 all of the relays now simulate all block submissions regardless of source.

While transferring funds to bloXroute’s builder to pay for the missed slots the builder considered the transfer of 11 ETH as an MEV tip for the validator and paid that 11 ETH to the Lido Execution Layer Rewards Vault on slots 4791729 and 4792026.

Proposal

This proposal is to return back 11 ETH that were sent to the Lido Execution Layer Rewards Vault.

If the proposal is supported, then an on-chain vote will be launched to send 11 ETH from the Lido DAO Treasury to the address 0xea48ba2edefae9e4ddd43ea565aa8b9aa22baf08.

03Mismatch analysis

AIMismatch analysis by Kvorum

A calldata-vs-description analysis is not generated yet. Review the decoded actions →

04Actions

0 total

This proposal carries no on-chain actions.

05Tally

Summed from votes

Voters908
VP participating0
Outcome (current)For
Current support100%

06Voters

908 total
Filter:
VoterChoice% of totalRationale
E00xe017…4e63For038.59%—4y ago
8B0x8b16…765bFor034.38%—4y ago
CC0xcc18…2575For025.31%—4y ago
100x10f5…d2feFor01.58%—4y ago
F50xf5f6…99a5For00.03%—4y ago
5B0x5ba4…b1edFor00.03%—4y ago
B00xb05d…385cFor00.01%—4y ago
880x8845…53f5For00.01%—4y ago
D50xd58a…6128Against00.01%—4y ago
020x024a…a8d9Against00.00%—4y ago
090x09fc…443eFor00.00%—4y ago
BC0xbc64…ae45For00.00%—4y ago
3D0x3d5a…b97fFor00.00%—4y ago
290x29eb…145eFor00.00%—4y ago
450x45fc…11cbFor00.00%—4y ago
850x857e…9e7fAgainst00.00%—4y ago
BE0xbe18…243dAgainst00.00%—4y ago
B80xb824…3400For00.00%—4y ago
140x1464…e535For00.00%—4y ago
D90xd9a2…b6b4Against00.00%—4y ago
B70xb7d8…7f63For00.00%—4y ago
690x698c…9ba0For00.00%—4y ago
550x55c5…7bccFor00.00%—4y ago
B40xb4e6…9ccfFor00.00%—4y ago
070x07d5…a04aFor00.00%—4y ago
680x6886…358bFor00.00%—4y ago
B40xb4dc…7e9aFor00.00%—4y ago
D50xd589…5685For00.00%—4y ago
D90xd929…b62cFor00.00%—4y ago
AE0xaeb9…3fd0For00.00%—4y ago
540x54d3…d439For00.00%—4y ago
0F0x0fd6…537cFor00.00%—4y ago
C50xc55c…c50fAgainst00.00%—4y ago
BC0xbca7…f93bAgainst00.00%—4y ago
3E0x3e74…73beFor00.00%—4y ago
760x7659…004aFor00.00%—4y ago
9A0x9a0a…f484For00.00%—4y ago
D50xd58f…0840Against00.00%—4y ago
1B0x1b11…2a4aFor00.00%—4y ago
A20xa25c…e128For00.00%—4y ago
FE0xfeb8…978eFor00.00%—4y ago
3E0x3e2e…4dc8For00.00%—4y ago
0B0x0bd3…022aFor00.00%—4y ago
8C0x8c2c…31bcAgainst00.00%—4y ago
6B0x6b96…4190Against00.00%—4y ago
280x280c…d64fFor00.00%—4y ago
3C0x3c0e…b4ffAgainst00.00%—4y ago
6D0x6d79…3c8cFor00.00%—4y ago
830x835e…7a07Against00.00%—4y ago
710x71f4…27e6Against00.00%—4y ago
Showing 50

07Forum

No forum thread is confidently linked to this proposal.

08Similar proposals

AI · embeddings

No semantically similar proposals found yet.