[BS] DOT #1715 - DotFuzz - Hardening Polkadot through TryState invariants and CI-fuzzing
active
Description

https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1715

  • A plan to make Polkadot safer from hackers
  • Adding checks (TryState) to important parts of Polkadot
  • Building a tool (DotFuzz) to find bugs automatically
  • Working with Polkadot’s team for 6 months
  • First step: Add safety checks to Polkadot’s code
  • Second step: Use fuzzing to catch hidden bugs
  • Deliverables: Reports, merged checks, and a public tool
  • Team has worked on Polkadot security before
Appendants
1
#1
11d ago

🟢 0 • 🔴 0 • ⚪️ 5
5 members abstained, higher than the 4-member threshold.
Vote #1: ABSTAIN
8 available members.
No CoI reported. DV delegation exercised.
https://polkadot.subscan.io/extrinsic/27533487-4
https://polkadot.subsquare.io/referenda/1715#4

Cast your votesingle

Votes·8

1ZSP...vx6w
1ZSP...vx6w
1ZSPR3zNg5Po3obkhXTPR95DepNBzBZ3CyomHXGHK9Uvx6w
Abstain
Abstain

Looks interested, though I'd like to hear feedback/support from the "core developers and ecosystem stakeholders" who are referenced.

14gM...deVb
14gM...deVb
14gMJV95zwxUsFEZDSC8mtBVifS6SypKJkfBKANkMsLZdeVb
Abstain
Abstain

Not sure the proposed content can work. I'd like to hear more opinions from polkadot core developers.

15fT...yBzL
15fT...yBzL
15fTH34bbKGMUjF1bLmTqxPYgpg481imThwhWcQfCyktyBzL
Abstain
Abstain

This proposal should've been submitted under Medium Spender. As far as I know, Asset Hub currently assumes DOT @ 10 USD. That aside, it would be good to hear expert opinion on this from the fellowship, PAL, Gossamer, Quadrivium, and protocol developers, it's not easy if even possible for the community to make a decision without it.

14Gn...YLEh
14Gn...YLEh
14Gn7SEmCgMX7Ukuppnw5TRjA7pao2HFpuJo39frB42tYLEh
Abstain
Abstain

I would like to hear comments and evaluations from developers and experts in the field, in order to understand the real scope of this proposal.

12s6...nE8h
12s6...nE8h
12s6UMSSfE2bNxtYrJc6eeuZ7UxQnRpUzaAh1gPQrGNFnE8h
Abstain
Abstain

Similar to other DAO members, we would like to wait for more opinions from protocol developers before making a decision.

167Y...TY9F
167Y...TY9F
167YoKNriVtP4Nxk9F9GRV7HTKu5VnxaRq1pKMANAnmmTY9F
Abstain
Abstain

Way too technical for normal people to get what is being offered, A seal of approval from parity or w3f would help steer the votes.

12Hi...E9N3
12Hi...E9N3
12His7t3EJ38tjdBbivUzWQeaNCLKfMqtKp1Ed3xHMyCE9N3
Abstain
Abstain
13ED...KQbF
13ED...KQbF
13EDmaUe89xXocPppFmuoAZaCsckaJy3deAyVyiykk1zKQbF
Abstain
Abstain

Discussions·0

No current comments
Information
Members
9
Timestamp
Created
Aug 18 2025 15:02
Start date
Aug 18 2025 00:00
End date
Oct 17 2025 00:00
Results
Voters
8
one-person-one-vote
Aye
0 VOTE
 
Nay
0 VOTE
 
Abstain
8 VOTE
 
© 2025 OpenSquare. All Rights Reserved.