Counter-Proposal: Fund cbETH Remediation From the Foundation Treasury, Not a Reserve Residual

Counter-Proposal: Fund cbETH Remediation From the Foundation Treasury, Not a Reserve Residual

Submitted by affected cbETH borrowers (co-signers below)


Summary

The current remediation mechanism pays affected borrowers from whatever protocol reserves are left over after bad-debt cleanup. By Anthias’s own 5/28 figures, that residual is tiny, it is being spent mostly on bad debt rather than on us, and on the protocol’s own pace full repayment is roughly five years away. We ask the DAO and the Moonwell Foundation to (1) decouple victim remediation from the reserve residual, (2) fund the outstanding remediation from the Foundation treasury that is publicly earmarked for ecosystem development, (3) pay on a fixed schedule with a hard completion date, and (4) denominate in-kind to match the assets that were seized.


1. The pace is measured in years, not months

The 5/28 proposal distributes 63.33 WETH this round (~$133K): about 53.33 WETH from swapping the cbBTC reserve surplus, plus 9.99984 ETH recovered from law enforcement. Roughly a sixth of the round is therefore a one-time outside recovery, not protocol capital.

By the proposal’s own accounting:

  • Total distributed so far: 169.27 WETH12.29% of the obligation.
  • This round lifts progress to approximately 16.9%.
  • Still outstanding: 1,208.01 WETH (~$2.5M).

Now the structural limit. Across all 20 Base markets, total reserves in excess of bad debt — the entire pool this mechanism is permitted to draw on — is approximately $175K. Distributing every last dollar of it would cover under 7% of what remains. At the protocol’s own March accrual rate (~$39k/month, which commenters on the original thread noted was abnormally high), the remaining balance takes roughly five years.

2. Reserves are being spent — mostly on bad debt, not on us

This proposal directs $550K of the $738K in current reserves to repay bad debt for zero-collateral addresses, and only ~$112K (the cbBTC surplus) toward cbETH remediation. After it executes, reserves fall to roughly $76K against about $4.6M of remaining bad debt.

The remediation engine is then left on fumes; the next round depends on slow new accrual or another outside recovery. Under this design, affected users are paid from whatever is left after bad-debt cleanup — a residual, not a commitment. Servicing protocol bad debt and remediating defrauded users are two distinct obligations, and forcing them to compete for the same $738K means bad debt wins every month.

(For reference, from the 5/28 report: total core-market bad debt is ~$5.17M across all markets and incidents; the cbETH market specifically carries ~$1.48M in bad debt against ~$2,600 in reserves. Total reserves protocol-wide: ~$738K.)

3. The funding source is the problem, not the timeline

The Moonwell Foundation has publicly stated it “safeguards a substantial treasury, including 9.47m USDC and 415.9 wstETH” — roughly $10.8M — “for the continued growth and development of the Moonwell Ecosystem.” The outstanding remediation (~1,208 WETH, ~$2.5M) is approximately 24% of that treasury.

Restoring trust after a self-inflicted, protocol-authored incident (MIP-X43, executed by Moonwell’s own governance) is the single most important ecosystem investment the Foundation could make. The money to make us whole exists. The mechanism simply points at the wrong pool — a near-empty reserve account instead of the treasury that was set aside for exactly this kind of ecosystem need.

4. What we propose

  1. Decouple remediation from the reserve residual. Victim remediation should not be funded from what is left after bad-debt servicing.
  2. Fund the outstanding remediation (~1,208 WETH, ~$2.5M) from the Moonwell Foundation treasury (and/or DAO-directed capital), not from protocol reserves that are being consumed by bad-debt cleanup.
  3. Commit to a fixed schedule with a hard completion date — for example, equal monthly tranches completing within 6–9 months — replacing the open-ended, accrual-dependent timeline.
  4. Denominate in-kind / ETH-equivalent (cbETH / weETH / ETH) to match the assets that were seized.
  5. No claim expiry. Claims should not lapse.

This consolidates the alternatives already raised in the original thread — horikorg’s proposal to have the DAO treasury supplement the gap to a ~12%/month repair rate, and hungvoooo’s tranche schedule — into one concrete ask. It is the documented good-faith alternative we have repeatedly been asked to provide.

5. This is the consolidated position of affected borrowers

The original remediation thread contains sustained, specific objections from multiple affected users (horikorg, HijackJetten, hungvoooo, tater1945, Meadiac, c_r909, and others), to which no member of the Moonwell team has responded. Two of those users have separately documented being muted in Discord for raising these concerns. We are asking, again, on the record, for direct engagement and a remediation plan that can actually conclude.

There is an opportunity here to set a precedent — to show that a decentralized protocol can take responsibility for its own error and make its users whole. We are asking the DAO and the Foundation to take it.


Co-signers (affected cbETH borrowers):

  • Vital / 0x3e2178CF851A0e5cbF84c0ff53f820ad7EAD703b
  • Horik / 0x893d6c896940fa58190013f4c97be56c2a7fb152
7 Likes

I support this and much prefer this over being paid back over 5 years. The treasury is in theory for situations such as this.

3 Likes

I am also in support of the proposal.

3 Likes

Waiting 5 years to be made whole is way too long, by then the bull season will be over and you will be in another bear market until you are made whole again. Essentially you would miss the bullmarket.

Moonwell caused this mess by nominating Ana as member of the Moonwell Security Council.

She used Claude AI to write code and didn’t verify the code and Claude Opus 4.6 wrote vulnerable code that led to a smart contract exploit with $1.78M loss.

https://x.com/pashov/status/2023872510077616223

cbETH asset price was set to $1.12 instead of $2200. On Github you can clearly see the commits were coauthored by Claude.

https://x.com/moo9000/status/2024040101982990534

Users shouldn’t pay because of Moonwell poor choices, a compensation that arrives late is not compensation. A lot will be lost in opportunity costs if users are made whole in 5 years.

3 Likes

I support this. We just want responsiveness, commitment, and transparency from all parties. Do as you say and say as you do. I do want to continue supporting Moonwell and this protocol but until a commitment is made, I can’t bear myself to supply again knowing the “what-if” it happens again. Rewrite the wrongs and let’s move on.

3 Likes

I support this, we are all sat with nothing while Moonwell is growing and adding ethereum, the protocol should look after its users and make them whole asap, 5 years is a joke

2 Likes

Why would we not use the security module as intended? $well is the backstop token.

3 Likes

I support this counter-proposal and would like to be added as an affected borrower / co-signer.

Affected wallet:
0x96A015038b83E1371676F28A8262C8A98D623114

The current process leaves affected users waiting on residual reserve accrual after bad debt is handled first. That is not an actual remediation commitment. It puts protocol accounting ahead of users who were liquidated because of a protocol/oracle failure, not normal market risk.

My dashboard status shows:

  • Owed: 6.81882704 ETH
  • Round 1 repaid: 0.83803209 ETH
  • Outstanding: 5.98079494 ETH
  • Status: Partially Repaid

At the current pace, this is not remediation in any practical sense. A five-year path to repayment is not making users whole; it transfers market risk and opportunity cost back onto the victims.

I support the following changes:

  1. Pause or deprioritize reserve-funded zero-collateral bad debt repayment until cbETH victims have a funded completion path.
  2. Fund the remaining cbETH remediation from the Foundation treasury and/or DAO-directed capital, not residual reserves.
  3. Set a hard repayment schedule, preferably no longer than 6-9 months.
  4. I Prefer USD denominated payments
  5. Remove any claim expiry.
  6. Publish a borrower-level repayment schedule showing expected tranche amounts and dates.

The protocol caused this loss through governance-approved protocol behavior. Restoring affected users should be treated as a trust-restoration priority, not as a leftover reserve allocation.

2 Likes