Insurance Protocol

Community Initiatives
#22

I like the idea you certainly have my vote.

1 Like
#23

100% support this. The fear of losing the funds to some hack or similar is what’s keeping me from going in big.

4 Likes
#24

Hey @bitn8 - would love to collaborate with you on ozone - do you mind dming me on telegram? @dokwon

2 Likes
#25

Will do! I just direct messaged you on telegram. +13158340005 Nathaniel T Hughes

1 Like
#26

I would love to join and help out in this process as well. I have software and fintech experience and would be able to contribute I’m sure.

2 Likes
#27

Looks like you responded to a fake account. Be careful.

#28

Fraud does exist, user error does happen however no blockchain insurance I’ve seen covers such things nor are people talking about such coverage. It is contract bugs that get exploited even after audits by reputable entities.

Insurance against contract bugs should be available and is useful. If a protocol advertises behaviour A and erroneously implements behaviour B that is not anything users should have to anticipate or try to calculate risk of because I’m pretty sure most people are not at all qualified to make such a calculation and those who are but have an interest either way will be very biased.

Anchor Protocol uses a more market based approach but will have limits because you can’t buy insurance if no one is willing to sell it to you. And any insurance offered by a protocol provider via some tax or treasury will have limits to the amount of coverage it can provide.

1 Like
#29

I disagree. Insurance is a slippery slope. Where do you file a claim? Why could we be hacked? I refer you to my post on finding another security source such as a Parachain which is secured to a very very trusted mainchain, Polkadot.

I personally believe that DeFi needs to stay safe because IT IS DECENTRALIZED. As soon as we start implementing normal banking policies, we might as well say ANCHOR NOT FDIC insured. No one is going to feel more secure because Anchor says (INSURED AGAINST LOSS FROM HACKING AND CYBER THEFT!)

That will be bad for business. Setting up policies and protocols that do not get hacked is the only way this is sustainable.

#30

BTC is 60% market dominance because it’s trustless permission less and PERFECTLY SECURE.

BTC (buy bitcoin and if you get hacked we have insurance) would have Bitcoin at $4 still.

#31

@40MillionMultiVac Thanks for your response and your concerns.

As currently stands we are setting up decentralized insurance that allows user to opt in or opt out. So people like who don’t want to insure their funds don’t have to opt into the insurance system. Creating insurance will not make it centralized, especially if it is a decentralized system that will run in a automated way as Ozone insurance will. More details to come but there will be no claims or DOA. There will be a Ozone vault that users can withdrawal from should their funds go missing from a hack etc.

I would counter your claim about not needing insurance. Black swans are always possible, not matter how good the code is or how decentralized it is. Decentralization doesn’t equal more or less risk. Also, just because a protocol has some similarities to the main fait system doesn’t make it centralized, the whole decentralized systems was based on ideas from the fiat system. Insurance as mentioned above can be decentralized and can also have freedom of choice i.e. being able to opt out.

We believe it will drive more business as overwhelmingly this is what the community has asked for and what other major defi projects are doing as well to secure more users. Insurance on Deif is not going away and we will only see more and more of it as we move forward.

1 Like
#32

Insurance Companies are for profit businesses.

How does the proposal account for all of the insurance money that starts to stockpile? How do you propose we use the insurance overflow?

Should we give it back to insurees or charge a flat rate once. Will it be a monthly thing? I guess I didn’t realize you could OPT-OUT or OPT-IN.

If we do have insurance it should just be automatic and a small fee should be built into the transactions of users or taking from the interest rates paying out to the loans to cover it.

Then the ANC incentivizing loans could literally .5% of it cover the insurance as part of the system seamlessly.

#33

DM me @dokwon tg please

#34

I completely agree. 40Million is arguing against a strawman of what Ozone is. When cover is decentralized and claims are decided by a DAO there is no CeFi “insurance company” bogey man to be afraid of. The only issue that I can see is when a decentralized insurance protocol itself has flaws - such as Cover has encountered - who insures the insurance? Well from my understanding there’s at least one more layer about Ozone in the global reserve or whatever it was called. And if that too failed you’re getting to the point of black swan squared events. You might as well worry more about being hit by an asteroid.

As with all financial things users need educating on the limits of Ozone - but they also need educating on the risks of Anchor / Mirror / Spar / etc. If we can do one we can do the other. And FTR I’ll bet most people have no idea what FDIC insurance actually covers, why it is there, and what its limits are. The reality is almost nothing - you’re actually just leveraging the Fed’s ability to lean on other banks to assume assets and debt, and its ability to print money to cover any losses.

I would suggest an interesting twist to insurance protocols covering contract flaws - if the auditing entities were themselves required to contribute to the insurance pool (or vault - whatever you call them) that backs coverage. That would, to me, create all the right incentives for them to do a great job since undiscovered bugs could cost them a lot of $. It’s the same kind of think - threat of slashing - that keeps validators honest, but they are rewarded for it too (as are insurance protocol pool contributors).

1 Like
#35

Ozone is very promising

#36

Hi ragnar could you explain further this thread? I’m interested in understand wich risk are involved when you’re just assured against depeg and Smart contact hacks, thank you in advance!

#37

I would be interested in this if it were available!

#38

It is now Risk Habor and we plan on doing trying to do a AMA with Orbital Command and Risk Harbor as soon as possible. Working on reaching out to Risk Harbor and when and if they can do it soon.

#39

I saw Risk Harbor. I noticed it’s sold out now :frowning:

1 Like