This proposal aims to standardize a process for the very exceptional case that a user requests Decentraland’s DAO to regain control of LAND and ESTATES owned by an account to which the original owner has lost access to.
Abandoned LAND: LAND that has not been used in any way since the terraform auction. Use includes deployments, transfers, marketplace listings (including unfulfilled), and the owner of the account signing into the marketplace.
Lost Assets: LAND and/or ESTATES held by an account where the associated private key has been lost. Does not include LAND or ESTATES transferred to an account through accident or theft, or LAND that has been abandoned.
Claimant: a user with claim to Lost Assets.
A user who has lost access to a private key and therefore to all LAND and ESTATES held by their account must have a way to present her case to the DAO in order to regain control of her Lost Assets. The DAO can not use this procedure to reclaim abandoned LAND. The DAO can only use this procedure to recover Lost Assets owned by a user who has lost their account’s private key.
The claimant needs to present evidence beyond reasonable doubt about the incident to prove herself the rightful owner of the lost account. The case will be published on the forum and will be reviewed by a Judicial Committee to ensure it complies with the requirements (see below).
If the case is approved by the committee, the claimant will be granted permission to deploy new content on the Lost Assets owned by the lost account but won’t be able to transfer the LAND and ESTATES for a period of time (12 months).
During that period of time, the lost account and the DAO will retain the power to revoke deployment permissions of the claimant. After that year the claimant will be able to transfer their assets freely.
Private keys will be lost and some users will fail in their efforts to protect their assets. In case of loss, if enough proof is presented to the DAO the rightful owner should regain access to her LAND and ESTATES tokens. See Ethen’s case as the first example.
Today it is technically possible to make a secure setup to overcome the loss of a key. For example by granting co-ownership to a second account or a multisig shared with friends.
However, given the current undeveloped state of the user experience for Ethereum, Web 3.0, and cryptocurrency in general with regards to advanced key management schemes, this kind of setup requires high technical knowledge from users.
This proposal aims to help those who fall into misfortune by providing a last hope, a journey to recover a lost account.
The ERC721 standard defines the concept of approvedForAll; an owner-wide role that can transfer any ERC721 of the owner, and also set UpdateManager roles. See roles recap.
This proposal requires updating the LAND and ESTATE smart contracts to add a mechanism that allows the DAO to set the co-owner of a lost account.
The update will be a new method on the registry that allows the DAO to set the approvedForAll role to an arbitrary address.
The new co-owner will be a smart contract that will function as an escrow of the assets first giving the claimant permission to update land and estates and after twelve months the claimant will be able to transfer the assets.
During a period of twelve months, the lost address and the DAO will keep the power to revoke the contract, an action that will return the LANDs and ESTATEs to the original owner.
The proposed changes to the LAND and ESTATE Registry are here. The intermediary contract is still pending and an external audit is still required.
To kick off this process the user needs to present her case publicly on the forum including all evidence possible. The case will be reviewed by the Judicial Committee.
Following a proposed guideline of requirements:
- The “lost” address must have a minimum of six months of inactivity.
- Specifically, no executed transactions by this wallet, either signing or sending txs.
- If the claimant has received anything inadvertently, this is not an indication that they have access to this wallet (air drops, scam coins, etc. )
- The user provides a description of how the key was lost.
- Objective proof of ownership, some examples are:
- Private messages signed with the “lost” key.
- LAND description linking to claimant’s personal info.
- Two witnesses testify on behalf of the user (over video).
- Character witness: Familiar with claimant’s cripto-goins (friend, work colleague).
- Expert witness: Developer or Community Member with technical experience.
Ultimately it will be the Judicial Committee’s decision to approve or reject the application. In case of doubt (by any member) the application will be rejected.
The three recommended committee members proposed alongside this new implementation are:
- Carl Fravel - Technology Executive, Member of many DCL districts.
- Peter Derrick - DCL “Bartertown” estate owner and long-time contributor.
- Yemel Jardi - Software Engineer and early contributor to DCL.
It is suggested and proposed that these committee members remain active for an initial period of 6 months before opening a poll to replace or renew them.
Can the DAO reclaim abandoned LAND?
No, this proposal does not address the issue of abandoned land, this is for future consideration.
Is this too much power to the DAO?
The process needs to be started by the claimant and the decision is made by the Judicial Committee. The DAO should not use this method for other cases without a formal community vote.
How can the DAO prevent fraud?
The address must be inactive for a period of six months and in case of approval, the claimant won’t be able to sell the land for a period of a year, giving time to the presumed “lost key” to appear and stop this process.
Form the Committee but don’t upgrade the contracts. Give the DAO a budget to buy land and return it to the claimant.
Upgrade the contracts but don’t form the Committee, just let the DAO to judge case by case.
Do nothing to help users that lost keys and handle the land as if were abandoned.
For: Upgrade Decentraland’s smart contracts to empower the DAO to regain control of LAND and ESTATES from a lost account.
Against: Do not upgrade Decentraland’s smart contracts to empower the DAO to regain control of LAND and ESTATES from a lost account.
Other: Revise the structure and terms of the proposal and publish a revised version.
- For: Upgrade Decentraland’s smart contracts to empower the DAO to regain control of lost assets
- Against: Do not upgrade Decentraland’s smart contracts to empower the DAO to regain control of lost assets
- Other: Revise the structure and terms of the proposal.