Ethereum Due Diligence Committee Call #3

Transcript

thank you all for being here definitely appreciate it hopefully you've already pulled up the eddc um the excel file that you're posted or even the one that nolan had posted previously um and that's in the eat staking evaluation channel because we will be discussing that today um the first item that i just wanted to notice is because i have questions on uh i noticed that our general channel was locked is is it locked for everyone or is it just locked for me uh buddha did some editing there this morning um because we had another user who said that they were getting um

unwelcome notifications and so he did some editing about an hour ago i can ping him now and ask him to check on that yeah i just wanted to make sure that something didn't happen or if it was an issue that we were all experiencing just just wanted to get the answer on that but as long as you know what's going on and you know can update the group whenever it's ready or whatever changes like that that's important that's all that's needed um two uh super fizz had some new members he was uh i think he had posted the general channel so i don't know if we could pull up exactly what he posted but maybe you can go over um the couple or a few new members that you thought would be good addition sure i'm happy to do that let me find

those messages really quick um this is where boomer me gets lost in all of these threads okay it's all right there we go uh so um in order of reference matterhorn is um someone who has been contributing for nearly a year um i do not know him personally but um he's very worth pulling up his profile and finding that he is a excellent and able-minded contributor um he is the one that i brought up first the second one would be phil phil.eth um phil is

just becoming more involved in our community but he has a very long history um with uh ether ethereum he um was an original miner on the olympic test net um way back in the day colin i don't i don't know if you want to speak more directly about him i only know him as a friend you may know him professionally yeah yeah i've actually only interacted with him professionally and it's it's been a good experience um he was brought in by deep work studio uh as an outside contributor to help us build the e2 launch pad um so he was part of the design process he was part of the research process and then obviously he's he's very involved in eth2 you know individually uh he definitely

knows what's going on um so i i would definitely vouch for him as i've only worked with him from a professional perspective and it's been a great experience and it's been all eth2 based so if he wanted to be on board i think he'd be a great addition and the third person is uh j-con 93 again a contributor since at least april i believe um he has a background in finance um and he has what i would call a very good uh perspective on the things that we're doing uh he's a very heavy contributor in the discord um and uh i think he would be also a great asset

um and that kind of goes to the thing that um if we acknowledge you know there are six of us here today or seven i guess um and i know that you know it com it ebbs and it flows but we do have some kind of vested interest in making sure that we have um vibrant participation agreed does anyone i have any qualms with allowing those three people to join awesome so thumbs up i'm in totally cool uh now i think the next step super fizz would be you know if they're not part of the discord

we should work on adding them to the discord and then uh either you can provide me their discord names and i'll reach out to them in order to get their email or um we can just get their emails and add them to the list so they're on future invites okay i will advise them they've been included get them added to uh the discord and we can take emails from there perfect perfect awesome so next item unless anyone wants to talk about anything regarding new members would be the staking pool evaluation discussion this is probably going to be the meat of our meeting in fact this will be the meat of our meeting so is everyone ready to kind of dive into here yep awesome so uh

as does everyone have the excel sheet pulled up um from the sticking pole evaluation channel so this is what i suggest uh hopefully you've all reviewed it already um what i suggest is we go through these one by one go through all their answers um and sort of just discuss what we think uh after each one we go through for example go through block staking we'll go through their answers and then we'll discuss internally do we think this should be a red yellow green right uh then uh after we get to that discussion maybe

someone had more passion and input trying to justify their answer um i would then suggest that the person who is passionate most passionate about why it should be red yellow green write up a quick summary of our discussion that could then be posted somewhere online which goes into the reasoning that we utilize for why we are rating it red yellow green what do you guys think about that process i think that sounds good i do have a question um and after i ask it if it's too early let's just let's just keep pumping but uh the question i have is so like question number one um and i kind of have some questions about how we're gonna format this so

are you confident that you are adhering to all the necessary regulations for the jurisdiction you are in um that's not a very standardized uh question and answer um the way that we've done that in the past is is that we've just it's kind of a binary question it's um you know do you use internal and external counsel and then it's kind of uh it's a ranking of this company has internal and external this company only uses external um so that that could be one way to kind of standardize it and then it would be you know the formatting would be internal internal internal external only external and that could give people of a gauge of like legal capacity uh instead of kind of these long

non-standardized answers um so just one one one thing to think about and um in addition like question number two um you know this this could be categorized as you know non-custodial semi-custodial fully custodial and then with a specific breakout of each provider um so as as i was going through the answers i i just kind of was curious about uh visually you know we're going to give him you know red light green light yellow light um but i think standardizing the questions a little bit more now that we've gotten answers uh maybe may be helpful for everyone yeah i think this is a good point before we move on is anyone taking notes at this point

i can't take notes awesome uh thank you so much so if i can clarify i think michael is recording um and as we discussed with terence terence is such a valuable contributor that we could take notes anytime afterwards as long as we have a recording yeah i can do that yeah so uh whoever wants you know i'm i'm happy to go through afterwards if i once i have the video um so just for me and i'm saying this really for myself like action items like the one that colin just brought up which is like language changes uh you know just just notice and keep track of all these language changes so we can then update the questionnaire that's sent out since we don't have everyone

right now maybe we ask the previous um answers if we don't get a satisfactory answer that can answer that new worded question uh maybe we ask them to answer it again and then we use that for future kind of uh sticking pools for their answers right i think what reporting is to capture the app is to capture the at action item versus the meeting notes right awesome uh is everyone ready to kind of go start with both blocks taking and move through how would you guys like to proceed would you like uh us to kind of go around in a circle

and read out the answers um like alternating that way do you guys want to uh you know take about a minute to read the first one and then come back and discuss i feel like if we're actually giving due diligence then we look together at the answer to every question um it's it's more of a of an actual look than a gloss so if we did a popcorn style reading and kind of what i'm planning to do is on my own sheet i'm going to highlight every answer as a red green or yellow so that will help me get a bigger sense for the whole the whole picture of an organization are we able to do a screen share of that

so we can actually go through that together as a yeah i was like i didn't i didn't mean responsibility yeah sure i'll i'll say that if you guys have the permission i can share the uh google form i i'm not opposed because there are so many uh over here uh but i i'm still learning how to share my screen i've got the google form answers which is formatted nicely

okay that's fine go ahead if if you're if you're game uh but it says my browser can't share my screen so maybe maybe i can't i don't know it's just it's grayed out now huh uh do you want to uh allow me to see it and then i'll try presenting i don't know if it'll work though how do i do that all right listen if it's gonna it sounds like it's gonna be too complicated um so what i've done is i've pulled up the excel sheet that was posted this morning by york

um it's not you know you still have to like you know open up each you have to expand the different cells but once you expand them you can effectively scroll from left to right and uh we can kind of go through a cell by cell that way so if everyone has those open what i kind of suggest is we have one person reading them while we're each following along individually yep that works as well this works as well is i i is my screen shared i was trying to poke around at it

yup your screen is being shared which is great so um is everyone cool with me now just reading through block staking i'll take the first one and then i suggest we go in a circle um and then do you guys want to have a discussion after every answer after every question or do you just want to discuss at the end i think we should discuss at the end i agree i agree all right so um which staking pool do these answers come from block staking what country is your business based out of israel are you confident that you are adhering to all the necessary

regulations for the jurisdiction you are in we have the leading crypto lawyers working with us no specific regulation we need to adhere for speaking as we do not hold any funds how much control do you have over users funds do you hold zero one or two keys none i don't know if that's so i've been working with with with the blocks team so sorry we'll we'll just talk about this at the end i apologize i don't want to distract no problem uh do you have any insurance in case funds are lost other than the usual liability in directors insurance no we do not hold funds what is your company's history in the

cryptocurrency phase a space excuse me we've begun in 2017 developing a crypto tracking app which evolved into a full-blown enterprise crypto dashboard and accounting platform serving the biggest names in the industry etoro dcg crypto.com ethereum foundation and more as part of the projects we've got a lot of experience in running robust infrastructure around 15 block chains that gave us the head start in building block staking as a lot of the work is making sure the infrastructure is robust and stable so give it two seconds here who are your team members and what are

their academic and professional backgrounds i'm alan a developer in the blockchain space since 2013 i've contributed code to bitcoin ethereum worked on the early ethereum project in 2014 to 2015 developed a multi-sig wallet named bitcoin authenticator and then blocks my partner adam has been in the space for years now he joined me at blocks in 2017. before that he worked in finance in one of the biggest banks in china and opened up the etoro offices in shanghai the rest of our team all in all about 20 people has been working at blocks for 2.5 years most are very involved in the crypto industry describe your staking setup do you have

your own servers if no which hosting providers are you using which clients are you using how many nodes are you using do you have some sort of redundancy built in etc i think best description is on our website we're being audited by least authority which is also audited the phase zero spec if you're using smart contracts have they been audited by whom not yet for the payments available after the mainnet will have a simple proxy contract which will go through an audit by least authority who is invested in your business is there venture capital is there a token if there is a token what is it used for

we have a couple investors the biggest one is etoro the rest are private angel investors we have a token named cdt how much are you charging for your staking services we are still discussing it internally we'll probably know in one to two weeks we'll update all right that concludes uh block staking so colin i think you wanted to say something yeah um i guess so blocks is working on like a few different things um and i guess the way that i've interpreted it is they have a longer term vision for for trustless pools which is why they're helping us out with the ssv effort but today you know their answer that

that they've given that says that they don't control any funds um sorry any keys um i think that's confusing because the way i've interpreted their solution is you know they they're running all the nodes themselves for people and until they can get to a better pooled status um so when i saw that answer i just i didn't feel as if that was true um because i don't believe that users are running nodes on blocks uh and staking if there's no reason for them to do so so the way i've interpreted blocks today is that they run the nodes and then people deposit with them um so in the future they may hold no keys

but today i'm pretty sure that they hold the validator keys um so i found that one to be a little confusing i would push back on that a bit my understanding is that they have a remote key signer program that users have to run and it's like a very simple program that fits into the amazon free tier and that program there is what holds the validator keys and that's on the user side it's on the user yeah right there dials out for one of their nodes fair okay so they that's that's the desktop app thing um the desktop app is just for um actually making the deposits

okay then they have a remote key store app that's also separate okay so when so when users stake with blocks they they also must provide their own resources at the same time yes okay okay so that's true then okay why would why would anyone well stake on blocks then um well i guess for the remote signer and and potentially the desktop app but okay that's aside from the point um okay i'm comfortable thanks nolan does anyone else have any thoughts about block staking

how do you but but you can't offered pooled solutions then right so it's not a pooled solution i don't think it is no um do we know whether this product is live and has users it went live yesterday actually or on monday sorry for for early bird stakers it went live on monday i'm also under the impression that it's worth full stakes of 32 ether um does it make sense and and if if this is not the appropriate time we don't need to discuss it but does it make sense to ask these companies

to provide some validated indexes for us to monitor their performance that would be really cool actually uh i had suggested as we're looking at this spreadsheet would it be beneficial to read green or yellow the questions so that we have some some point of reference for each one because it can quickly become overwhelming to look at these and not really know um so madison i'll let you guide if you want to do that and if it does work then i'm

happy to highlight here so that we can have a visual reference nope i but does everyone agree with that path forward i think we just tried to go through all at once that's i think it's a lot of information to go through so i 100 agree with super phys suggestion of going question by question red red light green light yellow light is everyone down yep and i i think it was good to do an overview because we we have to know kind of what we're getting into with each one um but then we can break it down a little more too 100 uh so let's just start with the first question what country is your business based out of unless you know i don't see how this is not

going to be a green but you tell me i don't think that's the real big evaluation question i i think that this is an interesting i i think it's a very important question i i think more important than than this question it's leading to another question which is we should potentially provide their terms of use to users um so they can easily access it um so i would say for for this for blocks in my eyes this is this is a green light i would love to know the external console and who they are that they're

that they're working with just i spend a lot of time in regulation and i don't believe that there's no regulation that they need to adhere to um that's not really how it how it works but if they're using outside counsel that's that's the best they can do but um i think offering users uh the terms of use for them to easily read and access is probably like the additional point that would be needed to make this section robust and if they don't provide the terms of use then maybe it's a yellow but i think that's that's the more important point here agreed so terms of use would turn it potentially green but until then yellow does everyone agree with that

i mean if they don't have the terms of use then you know they they legally shouldn't be doing business uh it's blockchain so people do it without terms of use but if we do really want to give someone a green on this category i i think the the candle on the cake if you will is is going to have to be a a terms of use that we can provide to people agree so the next question is how much controls do you have over users funds do you hold zero one or two keys and the answer is none as we discussed that's that's true for

them but again is is this a pooling list um because if it is then we're talking about their pooling solution then then it's not none and there is no pulling solution yet um so maybe maybe we discuss how um how this looks for blocks and if blocks is included in this initial list um because you know they have a couple different products they they have the self staking which we just talked about with the remote signer and then they're you know want to move into pooling um so i would just be curious as to what what people think about this answer from them because this list is supposed to be 32 and under and if

this solution to the keys doesn't tie to that product then we're kind of misleading users you know should we identify here that we're actually evaluating their remote signer tool and not because these are seem to be uh the answers seem to be specific to the remote signing tool and not to a pool for less than 32 ether does that sound fair yeah yeah we can be specific because blocks is has multiple products intestine has multiple products and sort of staked um so yeah i think that if we were to go back to them we would say you know we agree with all these answers but this sounds like the remote signer

product and what we're looking for is your pooling product um which doesn't exist so maybe they're left off the list which i wouldn't want to do um but i think that's that's kind of still this this answer here is a bit misleading without being more specific from our side all right so do you guys want to just stop evaluating blocks thinking now and move to the others because those are actual staking i mean i don't think we need to limit ourselves to just ghouls and that we have the answers i think we have an understanding of what blocks is like you know i mean the next one's a testing which isn't really cool either i think we have the resources available

to just go through these nine companies right now would everyone agree yep i also agree awesome um so let's let's move on to the next is do you have any insurance uh in case funds are lost again this this ties to the terms of use um this we can give a yes or no answer as kind of a binary output uh and then it should be supplemented by the terms of use because all this language for the user

should be in there yep so if it's if it ties to terms of use you would you would suggest to be yellow right um if if they have a terms of so similar to to the first question like terms of use gets both of these people a green light um if they give an answer and they don't provide a a legal proof um then it's yellow if they provide legal proof that matches then it should be green uh i kind of find this to be more documentation based and like legal agreement based to the user like you can say that you do something but if you have a legal agreement to

back it up then then you should be green lighted kirk and york thanks for joining just to make sure that we're all on the same page you're we're actually uh i'm at least uh you you have super fizz that's going fit through the uh different answers and uh we read through all the answers once and now we're going through them one by one and a red light green light yellow lighting them i have the document pulled up on my computer and just in the super fizz having it up which makes it more convenient might be more convenient for you as well to also have it on your own screen and we're just going through those answers one by one

right yeah so i'm saying what you're doing there with blocks um we do not hold funds that's true they don't at least not currently enjoy and we're actually so we're on the question now uh what is your company's history in the cryptocurrency space um so you know what do you guys think about this what do you think about their experience do you think that is deserving of a red light green light yellow light on our community call with alan um he seemed very competent and knowledgeable i think it's fair to say he's not some

fly-by-night scammer that's that's worked something up it's clear that he's an expert and i think it's it reflected well on block staking to have him on that call awesome so we think that this is green because they have good experience agreed awesome so who are your team unless anyone disagrees and by the way there's a lot of these answers so i'm gonna try to keep moving but if you do disagree at any time please just like interrupt me so um who are your team members and what

are their academic and professional backgrounds similar to the previous question i would say that uh especially based on what nolan said they seem pretty experienced but people agree with that yes awesome so if you're using smart contracts have they been audited not yet to me that's a red but you guys yeah i'm interested to see what you guys have to say yep yeah maybe even now if we make it cautionary then we're suggesting it's kind of okay to use an untested product um and and non-tested project now that does that obviously doesn't

make their entire product red it just makes that one category red so i think it's it's fair to assign that a great it should also have the note that it said available after mainnet so we're after mainnet perhaps this answers every day that's a good point that's a good point to bring up but this is what we know right now right exactly there's definitely more questions to be asked like you know what is this proxy contract they do not hold funds so why is there a proxy contract in the first place what does it do but maybe beyond the scope of this call right now so um describe your staking setup do you

have your own servers if no which hosting providers are using which clients are using how many nodes you're using do you have some sort of redundancy built in has anyone checked out their website and their github i have actually um so they are running their own validators and beacons and f1 nodes and then clients that the users would be running um remote signers that's the that's the setup so the blog

actually they posted this medium post um the other day i think was two days ago and it has raised a few concerns from the engineering team and the research team and the outline of this post is essentially they're implementing their own minimum selection protection and we reviewed it and the and the interior foundation reviewed it also and we don't think this is crash safe at all it should lead to a race condition with with the remote signer and the slashing protection so we are we're talking with elon and the block right now to read our concerns and uh just so just so just to keep you guys updated and and the and the

and the and the also keep this in mind so is that yellow or red i will say red for now until we further hear back okay awesome so the next question is who is invested in your business is there venture capital is there a token if there is a token what is it used for so this is a good question do we you know how do we red light you know like green light this question uh this token relates to their staking

pools which i think is not launched yet so i don't know it's hard to evaluate it's not even at least they're saying quarter 3 21. oh wow release date on that so baby we skipped this question what do you do you guys agree with that for now i don't i don't think it applies to their current product oh it's better better to skip than to try to answer things we can't answer great right so how much are you charging for your staking services we're just go you know this is another one that i

think we should skip since we don't really have an answer for it um have updated it since uh it's 180 180 flat fee per validator until transfers are available in phase 5.5 or soap to two years after activation i wanted to um come back to something from last call i think we had said we're going to focus on stuff that is not a full node mini stakers right people who have an f or 15 f or whatever but not people who have 32 and could run a solo note the current blocks offering is for someone with 32f who's running a remote signer and basically just wants

to hand the beacon and and f1 to somebody else to run so i'm not even sure that you know blocks has two offerings or will have two offerings the kind of replacement for solo staking and then the staker through contract thing and they're very very different one exists now and the other does not yeah and we kind of just decided that we have the answers so we should just pressure let's press onwards okay fair enough cooler otherwise awesome so uh would you mind just scrolling a little bit to the right so everyone can be on

the same page actually that's the end right that's that's the end so i think we're good so i think we have we have now red lighted yellow lighted or green light on is 180 per validator that makes sense to everybody for up to two years of staking i don't know that we are are we are we having an opinion on price well if they're charging five dollars for two years of staking that would be questionable to me not enough right right i think 180 is enough that it's actually covering their

costs for the next two years yep fair enough i needed to step out just for a moment did we uh did we highlight this final block four blocks we're still we're still almost done it seems like nolan you're suggesting it you're green because it's reasonable it's not exploitative and it's enough to make it work well i i won't evaluate like whether it's too expensive i'm just saying it's expensive enough that it's a viable business if it were five dollars for two years that's in my opinion not really a viable business i think we should just green light it as

long as it's reasonable yeah green light makes sense to me awesome so now let's move to a testing and if someone can help out kirk in the chats as we move along uh that would be uh terrific um so you guys want me to take the same approach where we read through them all and then we go through them one by one or do you just want to go through them one by one what i suggest is we go through them one by one we you know i'll read it out loud and then we discuss and then we rate it and then move to the next one i think it'll save

some time yep i think that's the format awesome uh so tested what country is your business based out of united kingdom everyone agree awesome so are you confident that you're adhering to all the necessary regulations for the jurisdiction you are in yes equally important we here to the necessary regulations for the jurisdictions in which our customers reside now the the only difference here that

that is confidence inducing for me but um we had discussed earlier about the need for terms of service so um but we didn't actually ask for them so he answered the question in a way that suggests that they're if you know what i'm saying like they're doing those things so what do you guys think do you guys think we put them as yellow and then ask for the terms of service and once we get the terms of service we turn them green which is what we did with um the first one that sounds like the most consistent and fair approach i agree so yellow and then we ask them for terms of service

to get more information to turn to green um how much control do you have over users funds do you hold zero um zero one or two keys our customers maintain control of their withdrawal keys which provide them complete control over the movement of their funds as well as reward to maintain control the validator keys to resilient and secure threshold signing configuration we do this so that we all can offer a full service if the customer had complete control of the validator keys they would need to maintain the systems that looked after those keys to ensure their validations are signed which will

be against the idea of a staking service equally if the customer had control of validator keys it would be possible for themselves or third parties with access to their keys to create slashing events whose origin could not be ascertained our configuration ensures that we are responsible for validating and the customer maintains control of their thoughts i mean this isn't my favorite setup as a crypto enthusiast but i mean this this is what a lot of people want and it's what their product is so i think it's fair to say green as a staking as a service company

that's something i also struggled with like my my green standard is really only solo staking and so if we're accepting that we are in this cautionary standard where you're using a third party um then recognizing that we're in a cautionary band is this good within a cautionary band even though it's not that standard of solo staking i mean as far as staking the service pools go this is preferable to holding two keys which i would say is more worthy of a yellow light

it sounds green does anybody does anybody take issue with that next one uh do you have any insurance in case funds are lost no yeah that's worrisome right so they're saying we have the best technology we're not going to be like staker and slash ourselves but if we do then oh well too bad so sad and understandable i mean i've looked at what um custodial insurance costs it's it's not pretty i can't believe it so the question is for anyone that says

no do we want to and as long as we apply a standard fairly it's not wrong but if we say that it's yellow or red um i i honestly i would say that it's red because there is going to be middle ground and this is not middle ground this is simply don't have it which is not it may be a common approach but it's yep yes and and a testant i think in particular is for people with more than a thousand deaths so maybe they have their own insurance but uh yeah um i think it's a fair standard to say red and i'm gonna make a note here that we're assuming this is the product for more than a thousand each when it it

could very well they could present two products and we would just need to disambiguate those at some point true let me ask ask a question if it's okay in the context of red for that which i think is fine by the way um why wouldn't we want to and it is a it's a group called east staker we're not just east staker solos um east staker uh staking services raiders or ether staker as heath taker if we define controlling all your own keys as green why would we in the previous category decide that everybody who has their validator keys with with a third party is green why wouldn't we just say yeah you're in you're yellow i mean there was if you

don't own all your keys you're never green and you're red that's kind of the thing i was i was talking about that before like we're talking about if we zoom out there are three tiers there is solo staking which is green there is pooled staking which is yellow and there is exchange sticking with which is red everything that we're discussing today even though we're evaluating something that's out of category is a yellow band and so within that yellow band we can assign relative ratings so while we recognize that pool staking is cautionary this is good for that cautionary process i think that makes sense because otherwise we end up with you know no nuance anymore we're just

like well it's a pool so everything's yellow and i think it's very important to when we get to graphically representing that that we have those three tiers and show this in the middle with so by default everything here is yellow okay so i i i don't even i don't like what i said i'm not sure that it you know i had a user experience for somebody just coming to our site which conceivably has more than just taking services i think they're going to walk away with green that's a nice pretty vivid green i'm looking on super physical screen i feel okay about that i would just think that all the staking services that don't leave you in control of your your validating keys

would not be green that's just my sense but i'll shut up on that comment that basically leaves services where you uh that leaves blocks and and and uh rocketpool i think that's it you know and it doesn't leave anybody who has less than 32 because there you will not ever have your validating keys and maybe that's where we go well as we're developing our relational judgment it may be necessary to to come back and adjust um right because it is all relative and we have to get that relative judgment worked out yep

awesome uh so i think we're we're gonna keep it green for now quick housekeeping if i may it looks like we have 10 minutes left in this call are we are we going as far as we can and then come back or what's the intent yes the way i agree and i've been noticing that as well what i suggest is we go as far as we can and then even next week we continue on it's possible longer which makes sense folks we're we want to discuss each answer there needs to be you know enough time yeah i'd love a discussion about one of the previous raids which i didn't fully understand but let's keep going uh madison i'd like to clarify what you said that we're going to leave that one green which which field were you referring to uh i

was referring to because uh this is the one that kirk pointed out how much control do you have over users funds uh we're going to leave that green despite it despite it being it it's definitely custodial but that's what we're going to have it as a green and now do we have any insurance in the funds the answer no is still red i got it thank you i was confused for a moment yep sorry about that um what is your company's history in the cryptocurrency space i tested itself was formed a little over a year ago with its sole focus on providing ethereum two staking services the founders have many years experience in the cryptocurrency space including significant work on bitcoin one of our team was founder of the

multi-bit wallet and ethereum the ethereal command line tool ems ethelink etc it's a green for me yep same here yeah we've had incredible experiences with them contributing knowledge to the community awesome so green i think we're all agreed there can move on green fire the founders can be obtained at contestant.io uh if anyone's checked it out can you just update everyone here on what that looks like i have not checked it out i do know just the same that nolan has from

personal experience having dealt with uh jim on many occasions that um he actually described his educational background in uh one of our community calls he is very well qualified to do the service that he's offering awesome so are we okay with giving it a green no objections we'll move on to the next one sweet if you're using smart contracts have it been audited by whom no smart easy easy green yep describe your sticking setup do you have

your own servers if no which hosting providers are you using which clients are using how many nodes are you using do you have some sort of redundancy built in a testing runs dedicated hardware in tier three and four data centers importantly has no dependency on cloud services the infrastructure is designed to be highly resilient with entities either simply redundant as to say beacon nodes where multiple servers and different data centers are active at all times or redundant through threshold that is to say signers where two of five signers can be unavailable without service loss intestine has built its own validator client vouch to work with multiple beacon nodes for the

highest levels of resiliency as well as maximum responsiveness and optimum selection of beacon block proposals and attestation data so that all sounds great to me it is somewhat worrying that they're using their own validator client that hasn't received the same public scrutiny and you know tested status as the other yup um and i'm not sure whether vouch has gone through its security auditing yet i think it's it's fair to even though

i'm optimistic it's fair to make it a yellow yeah i think we need to uh find an audit or something one of the ones we can come back to we should recognize that these are tentative findings in every case and every one of these can be further informed and updated so that's right that's fair all right who's invested in your business is there eventual venture capital is there a token if there's a token was it used for intestine is privately funded it has no token green for me same here agreed awesome how much are you charging for

your staking services we charge 17.5 percent of rewards the discounted rate of 12.5 up to the first 45 days after genesis for customers who wish to join us early for the staking journey yup that's right in line with normal pricing and will be enough to fund them can we go up one there was a red answer i didn't understand and then we'll be out of time once we've discussed that i agree i said yeah let's not go through another one we'll save it for next week and let's just review the one that you wanted to go through please if you don't mind uh if we just go up one uh i i have i'm a block staking now that's what you're oh it's it's not visible on my screen

it's not updating so blocks we set for the staking setup red what was the reasoning behind that what's the worry i'm sorry is this the stinking setup i don't see it right now on screen but i think it was i think there was a red on block staking setup oh yeah i tried to stop my share and reshare i can um chime in to it a little bit more so the blog had this medium post the other day i shared it in the chat earlier yep i read it oh yeah so there was um concerns coming from us and the ethereum foundation

whether this um their proposal is not crash safe so uh the minimal slashing protection okay gotcha iron crash that there could be a rate condition with the slashing protection and okay the remote side there so we are asking them to provide more information also we're giving them some of their concerns as feedback so i'm here so until we hear back from them i'm tempted to put it as red understood yeah thank you okay this mechanism has been merged into the prism slasher and into the remote signer okay interesting but it's not in the prism validator client nah so prism has a slasher of the third

party library which yeah which we're not doing the best job at to be honest so yeah okay got it wonderful good i understand thank you for clarifying no worries terrific so i don't think we should move on to the next one purely because we're going to run out of time uh for next week if everyone can get here soon uh to 11 a.m as possible and i'm just we're not going to do any introductions we're not going to talk about any other topics we're just going to open it up right where we left off and try to push through the goal being to get as many of these done as we possibly can would you guys agree with that yes uh we have three new members potentially

coming next week it would be fair to give them a or maybe uh you're right definitely i agree so just to play devil's advocate with that one uh you know they they could definitely watch the recordings and catch up and watch this one too to save time if we want to do that road too well i'd also like to point out that um we got through two businesses today we have seven more to go uh maybe this is something we can take you know just just discord via text um maybe we could nominate someone to use their own judgment and mark things

red yellow green and then we only discuss what we have agreements with in their decision i feel like this is the meat of what eddc is supposed to do and for it to be completely public and transparent is of the most value so to do that individually or in small teams asynchronously brings less value to the entire system is there an asynchronous method where the input can be clear i mean i'm not i don't know i don't want to design that but it'd be like here's a cell and then here's beside it 13 spaces where different people can put their thoughts but it's asynchronous because

this route of getting only through two this week seems to be a challenge for us and i think the synchronicity brings value well mostly i'm just saying like what this rate will be still a month out from getting this done now so what if what if we try to do what if we get one more meeting in this week and if we try to do so we have seven left if we have one meeting where we do three and one meeting where we do four that way by next wednesday we'll have all of these done i know it's it's an extra workload but it remains transparent and it does meet the the goal of the organization yeah i'm good with that

to wait another four weeks to get this done it's not ideal i agree so i think we you know if anyone unless anyone objects we take super fizz's idea to get another meeting or two in there i do think that it will go faster in the future since we actually improved our efficiency as we moved along with this as we figured out what worked and what didn't work um but what i'm going to do is i'm going to schedule two meetings for next week and then we'll go from there does everyone agree with that next step yep awesome well thank you guys so much really appreciate your time uh we did get through a lot i know we didn't do as much as we wanted

but uh it's good that we went over each of these questions one by one and at least had everyone had the ability to put in their two sets thank you yup thank you thank you [Music] madison