[Proposal: MB12/MR9] Moonbeam Multisig support and optimization for Moonbeam, Moonriver and Moonbase

Title - [Proposal: 12] [Status: Submitted] Moonbeam Multisig support and optimization for Moonbeam, Moonriver and Moonbase.

Moonbeam Multisig Official Link: https://multisig.moonbeam.network
Staging Environment: https://staging.multisig.moonbeam.network


This proposal aims to show our intention to be part of the Moonbeam treasury program for supporting our well-established Moonbeam Multisig (aka Moonbeam Safe); GLMR will be fully converted to productive hours, covering infrastructure costs, and incentivizing team members to be committed in order to proactively improve key component of Moonbeam’s ecosystem.


Moonbeam Multisig is a fork of Gnosis Safe, which is well known as the most trusted platform to store digital assets on EVM due to its programmability. We consider this project a successful case where community users, DAOs and DeFi projects trust and use it to safely store assets and interact with Smart Contracts which directly supports TVL growth and would keep benefiting the Moonbeam community.

Project Overview and Team Experience

As the upstream Safe codebase is being constantly updated and changed by the Safe team, new releases need to be merged making sure it is updated and compatible with the Moonbeam Multisig instance.

Regular Safe updates will be performed and released on Moonbeam networks (Moonbeam, Moonriver and Moonbase). Updates consider Frontend (mainly user experience improvements), Backend services and Smart Contract.

Optimization also includes research and implementation of such features as Safe dApps, Modules, Guards, External Wallets Connectors, and customizations according to community needs.

Our team is a combination of management and development skills:

  • Field CTO: Ivan.
  • Project Manager: Eduardo.
  • Blockchain Engineers: Nick, Marta, and Nikita.
  • DevOps Engineers: Leonid, and Ilya.

Protofire DAO team:

  • Worked as part of the Gnosis team on delivery of web and desktop versions of Gnosis Safe.

  • Delivered Gnosis Safe Apps (such as Compound, Synthetix Mintr Safe App, designed ENS Manager).

  • Created a devkit to improve the synchronization of the code in the Gnosis DApps.

  • Is a Gnosis Chain and Gnosis Beacon Chain validator.

  • Have been deploying and maintaining Gnosis Safe instances on several networks: Evmos, Velas, Astar, Cronos to name a few.

  • Is an active member of the Safe community (Safe Guardians); we use our power to contribute positively to the ecosystem, aligning with Safe vision to drive the adoption of smart contract wallets.


Moonbeam Multisig adds value to the ecosystem in the following ways:

  • Gives the community a trusted custody option for asset management. Safe smart contracts have passed the highest possible security standards in the industry including Formal Verification. Read more.

  • Allows Protocols to deploy and interact with smart contracts in a secure manner which attracts top protocols, increases adoption and TVL.

Moonbeam Multisig attracts high-net-worth individuals, companies, holders, funds, developers, DAOs, and investors due to its reputation and programmability.

Key Terms (optional)

Safe/Gnosis Safe/Multisig Wallet: multi-signature smart contract wallet that allows users to define a list of owner/signer accounts and a threshold number of signers required to confirm a transaction.

Overall Cost

Protofire DAO is requesting funding for 6 months of maintenance. Subsequent maintenance funding requests will be initiated one month prior to the expiration of the previous Treasury Grant.
Funds disbursement: upfront. Funds remaining from the past month will be moved to the following month.

Total cost: 45,600 USD (equals a monthly cost of $7,6k) equivalent to 80/20 respectively in GLMR and MOVR.

The conversion rate will be set as the 30-day twap (time-weighted average price).

Use of Treasury Funds

Treasury Funds will be allocated as follows:

Title Costs
Infra Costs $1,200.00
Support and Optimization $6,400.00

Infra Costs include:

AWS Service Purpose Infra Costs, %
ECS Safe microservices 63%
CloudWatch Logs, metrics and alarms 12%
RDS Safe database 10%
Other (ELB, WAF, ElastiCache, Route53, S3, CodePipeline, ECR, Lambda) Load balancing, security, cache, dns, static files, deployment pipelines, docker images repository, monitoring functions) 15%


Support and Optimization include:

  • Safe Updates: Regular Gnosis Safe updates will be performed and released on the supported networks. Updates consider Frontend (mainly user experience improvements), Backend services and Smart Contract.

  • Safe Features: Research and implementation of features like Safe dApps, Modules, Guards, External Wallets Connectors, client customization, etc.

  • Infrastructure Support & Monitoring: DevOps support and monitoring, covering all aspects of infrastructure security, architecture optimization, monitoring and CI/CD pipeline enhancement in order to improve cost-effectiveness and scalability.

  • General Support: General support is provided to Moonbeam community, business, and technical teams considering incidents analysis and troubleshooting, research, and general inquiries.

We expect distributing hours as:

Role % Expected - Productive Hours Distribution
Management 10%
Blockchain Eng. 70%
DevOps Eng. 20%


Safe Global Licenses describe all the third-party software that may compose (in small portions) our Moonbeam Multisig solution:

https://safe.global/licenses (only Web section is applicable).

Steps to Implement

Moonbeam Multisig is currently in the maintenance phase; funds will be allocated to cover only infrastructure resources and team working hours on maintenance, updates and optimizations.

On-chain Application Details

Total cost: 45,600 USD (equals a monthly cost of $7,6k) equivalent to 80/20 respectively in GLMR and MOVR.

Token Amount call hash
GLMR 129883 0x1ed1310ec8bede48a044db247fb0e9266c6d401675cd61db582986551fa45e31
MOVR 1431 0xf57f0cbc559bb1cc49dd08073c39abca50a40e6dc0ac0f9440994f20e83e6d94

Base spreadsheet for calculating 30-day TWAP and respective proposal values:


Hey, Eduardo. Thank you for your proposal and the hard work you’ve put into Moonbeam Safe, which is an incredibly important platform. our community has been inquiring about the possibility of staking and voting on governance via Moonbeam Safe. could you please inform us if such an options is currently planned or being considered? Thank you again for your efforts :slight_smile:


Hey sir, thanks for you work,

I agree that having a good Multisig platform is essential in the ecosystem, however, To make it clear, the $6,400 per month is simply for maintenance?

not add new features?

and if new functions are added, or are planned to be added, it would be good to give a full detail about them, for example the one mentioned above by turrizts

Thanks u

Hi @turrizt , I hope you are well!

This topic is currently under discussion and has high priority on our backlog. We are expecting results by this next quarter. Also, we want to focus more on Safe Apps Research & Development; the current version Moonbeam Safe is quite mature and stable and now it is time to expand its usability.

In any case, thank you for your important point and for caring about making our Moonbeam Safe more relevant!

1 Like

Hi @jose.crypto , how are you? :smile:

Yes, we are adding and planning to add new features (Safe Apps, Modules, Guards, Wallets).

Our support and optimization contain 4 abilities:

  1. Safe updates: which basically are merges to keep the instance up to date (equals Safe Global).

  2. Safe features: R&D, Safe dApps, Modules, Guards, External Wallets Connectors, client customization, etc.

  3. Infrastructure Support & Monitoring: DevOps support and monitoring.

  4. General Support: incidents analysis and troubleshooting, research, and general inquiries.

Regarding the number 2 (Safe features), as an example, we have recently added Pangolin Safe App, and extending the list, last Months we included:

  • Safe Apps: WalletConnect, Transaction Builder, CSV Airdrop, Drain Account, Revoke.Cash, and Pangolin.

  • Wallet: WalletConnect.

  • Module: Spending Limit.

Our current panel of possible compatible Safe Features is:

Also, @turrizt mentioned an important topic which is staking and voting on governance via Moonbeam Safe; we are discussing some possibilities and this item has the highest priority at the moment!


ok thanks for the answer, it is in my interest to ask if there will be other methods besides treasury funding for the work done? If this were the case, what would they be?

Hi @jose.crypto , I hope you are well!

There are only two models:

  1. A public model (grants, treasury - what we are applying for ) or

  2. A commercial model where we would need to charge for use of the service.

We believe that Moonbeam SAFE is a perfect example of a public good for the ecosystem and that brings a tremendous benefit to the community by having it for free! Hence, we are applying for this grant.

perfect thanks for u answer @esantos089 and you would not consider using UnitedBloc as part of your RPC nodes, this can help both in the ecosystem

Wdyt @Jim_CertHum @Daniel_TrueStaking

We are happy to help. Looks like 45% of the infrastructure costs are RPC related. We’ll discuss with @esantos089 and see if we can meet the need.

Is more like 60%, no ?

1 Like

My personal opinion is that I think it would be detrimental to the ecosystem if teams had to pay for the SAFE app and I also think it serves a very important role for many teams and DAOs deploying to Moonriver/Moonbeam in order to manage their treasuries. Just my 2 cents…


Yes, I agree that having a Multisig available is essential for the ecosystem and the teams that build on the ecosystem

for now my only point of interest would be the last one mentioned regarding the RPCs, if UB can help lighten the costs associated with RPCs, it would be beneficial for both

If the team thinks it’s not a good approach, I’d like to hear from the team.

in order to continue with the proposal

Thanks for putting up the proposal @esantos089 .

@jose.crypto the only comment I would add is that having the protofire team run their own infra ensures that they control the entire product they are offering to Moonbeam users.

Maybe it is a good thing to drive down cost, so it could be explored for a few months and if performance is not up to standards (which I doubt because UnitedBloc has work reliably for me when I’ve tried) they can move to a in-house infra model.

@Daniel_TrueStaking @Jim_CertHum @esantos089 what do you guys think? We are happy to connect you guys


This seems a good idea and we are happy to explore any way that UnitedBloc can benefit the community. Please do connect us.

1 Like

Hi guys,

@AlbertoV19 already mentioned our point “running our own node brings security and stability; we can trust and manipulate it (if necessary)”.

In any case, it makes total sense to try it out for a few Months and check the results!

We will orchestrate the use of UnitedBloc RPCs.

Thanks @jose.crypto for the insight!


thank you @AlbertoV19 @esantos089

yes, it makes sense, well in any case if in this period the Team tried to use UB like rpc nodes, it could be discounted this time

and in any case the performance is not as expected, return to the previous method and add it in the next period

I would like to confirm how you are going to proceed, so we can go ahead with the proposal :raised_hands:

1 Like

Hi @esantos089 , if you can provide some details (source IPs, regions) we can provide some data analytics back to you too, like number of calls, type, etc. We can take the discussion to TG if you want to explore how we might provide you a bit more visibility. The UB Telegram is Telegram: Contact @UnitedBloc, and we can take it private from their to share details you don’t want public, or to set up a call.

1 Like

@esantos089 / @jose.crypto - perhaps we could proceed with the plan as is to get the proposal approved and in the meantime, some experimentation and testing can be done and then when/if they switch to UB, any savings could be detailed in a follow up to the proposal and then either returned to treasury or discounted from the next period?

I dunno, just a suggestion as it may take a bit of time for the team to assess the feasibility. Unless of course @esantos089 thinks this can be turned around quickly?

Hi @jose.crypto , happy Friday!

We are currently testing it :laughing:, we started by our Staging environment.

Having good results, we will definitely cut infra costs off!

Hi @aaron.mbf ,

By the next week (17 - 21) April we will have some feedback; we are currently testing it!

1 Like