Threshold
Hate to point it out, but your proposal has some tehcnical error.
By the objective you listed "Break the Chain", if your purpose is to stop the hacker using parachain for further malicious activity, forceSetCurrentCode to 0x is enough. setHead to 0x means eliminating all history of your blockchain, which given your preivous debate https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1326 here, your setHead to 0x is not only non-neccesary but also way too aggressive (why would you want to discard all your history and restarting a new parachain when there is still a better choice? It is too much even if you do not have referenda 1326 debate).
Plus I have noticed that your parachain already stop producing block for 321 hrs, https://polkadot.js.org/apps/?rpc=wss%3A%2F%2Fparallel.gatotech.network#/explorer. So I am afraid that even setCurrentCode to 0x is not neccessary from technical perspective. You should directly set a new fix code.
And for registrar.removeLock, you mentioned "This operation removes the lock that may prevent further modifications or actions on the parachain.", but from my understanding, this operation will remove the lock and make it more easy to modification/action. this conflicts the purpose of your proposal? Maybe you can explain more.
And last, I do not like using root to forceUnstake/transfer account's fund, but since beneficial account you mentioned is hard-coded neutral, I pretend I am okay with that (Still I think the root referedum is impossible to achieving your target given the time limit, have you even counted how much vote require to pass the referedum intime?). But you still need to clarify who you are. The proposer is different from previous proposal fix proposal https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1339. So I am still very cautious about your identity.
I am open to change mind, but given current info,I will vote Nay for this proposal, since the technical fix is way too aggressive and calldata conflicting the proposal itself.
Edited
The team at SRLabs fully supports this proposal.
Keep in mind that the proposal must execute ASAP. We cannot wait until the end of the full voting period, at which point the funds will already be lost to the hacker.
Please support this proposal to send a signal to future hackers that Polkadot remains highly hacking resilient! Thank you!~
gm @PolkaMario
Thank you for your thoughtful feedback on our proposal and we appreciate your perspective.
Governance Intervention: We understand your apprehension regarding the role of governance in this situation. The urgency of this proposal stems from an unprecedented attack that has directly jeopardized our user funds. While we recognize that previous incidents (like those involving Acala and Moonbeam) were managed independently, the nature of this attack is unique and requires immediate intervention to prevent irreversible loss. We have explored several options, and it has become clear that the only effective way to secure user funds is to intervene at the Relaychain level. Our aim is not to set a precedent for future bailouts but to protect the community's assets during this emergency.
Security and Responsibility: Your point about security starting at the project level is valid. We take full responsibility for the security measures in place and are actively working with Parity and srlabs to enhance our parachain going forward.
Decentralization and Chain State: We share your concern about overriding normal protocol behavior. The goal of this proposal is not to compromise decentralization but to take decisive action against a critical threat, especially from a relentless attacker. We firmly believe that this intervention is essential to safeguard the broader community from possible repercussions.
Verification of Non-Controlled Account: Regarding the transfer to a "non-controlled" account, we assure you that this address is generated from a deterministic input that does not correspond to any private key. This ensures that the funds cannot be accessed or manipulated by any party, including ourselves. You are encouraged to test the code included in the proposal for transparency.
Return of Funds: In the second proposal, we will outline a clear and transparent process for returning the 200,000 DOT to users. This will include:
We hope this response clarifies your concerns and please let us know if you have more questions.
Edited
Voted AYE only because i hope that the innocent parallel users will be able to withdraw their funds from this scam parachain.
Dear Proposer,
Thank you for your proposal. Our first vote on this proposal is AYE.
The Root track requires 60% quorum according to our voting policy. This proposal has received seven aye and zero nay votes from ten members. Below is a summary of our members' comments:
A significant majority of voters expressed strong support for the proposal, emphasizing the urgency of its approval amid ongoing concerns surrounding Parallel Finance. Many voiced a desire for the ongoing issues to be resolved quickly, highlighting community backing for the measure. Overall, the sentiment was one of collective hope for a swift resolution to the current challenges faced.
The full discussion can be found in our internal voting.
Kind regards,
Permanence DAO
I don't know if Yubo Ruan is even a real person. I looked him up on one of those people search engines, and the real estate agent selling his alleged house had no idea who he was. If you check the Founders Fund they make zero reference to Parallel Finance. His Wikipedia page also only points to sources of questionable quality. Also Parallel applying to delist their token from Kraken as part of a transition plan to a new token made zero sense. Was probably part of a plan so they control the price.
With that being said I don't know if the hackers are trustworthy either. We should turn this over to Gavin and/or the W3F, and have them distribute funds back to addresses so they can withdraw everything. The only other option is Yubo exposes his location and real identity so he can be prosecuted and/or sued to recover funds if he rugs.
If he is a criminal Vitalik could probably address their L2 on Eth as part of whatever solution he comes up with for the Bybit hack. Sounds like Parallel could be a good opportunity for the two blockchains to build trust and value by coordinating to address blatant criminal activity.
Great to see collaboration with Parity and srlabs! This adds credibility and gives me confidence that the team can effectively execute this plan