I think that someone from AAVE Team should be in a good position to answer this question because as you know most of the assets on Harmony chain are “heavily discounted”.
Tranquil (the other borrowing/lending market on harmony) stopped borrows within approx 2 hours of the hack if I recall correctly.
All the money I had deposited on there is safe and able to be withdrawn still.
I think saying we expect “magic” from aave is a little bit of an unfair characterization.
Everyone knew the risks, but we also expect the protocols we engage with to act responsibly as well.
When we have a near identical platform we can point to that did the right thing, where the users funds are completely safe, it’s no longer asking for magic. The situation was mismanaged.
Going forward, unless there is a real solution to this, I might avoid aave given how it seems there is too much bloat and red tape for it to operate immediately when market conditions require it.
1 Like
Venus Protocol (BSC) handled this type of the situation also in quite efficient way:
But still it should be resolved somehow. Otherwise market is frozen and nothin happens. Should be some value locked.
1 Like
They need to do something this is getting stupid. The protocol owes all the people that placed assets on Aave. They don’t need to make everyone whole they just need to allow people to remove their de-pegged or devalued one assets.
1 Like
Harmony now established RecoveryOne. Please voice out your suggestion or proposal on how the depeg can be solved and how this can help restore fund in AAVE. It is due on 24 Aug.
Were you able to communicate with harmony recovery to fix the uncollectibles loans?
1 Like
This is the recent update from the Harmony Community Forum:
“However working with partners like AAVE , Tranq, and others require communication directly with their teams and sharing that information before everyone is on the same page, would just cause more confusion. Working diligently with key partners to review submissions from Recovery1 and the community in this regard.”
I believe this is the official statement from the Harmony Team.
Source: AMA With Stephen Tse - Community - Harmony Community Forum
Should we start discussing how we should make use of rONE for solving the issue here in AAVE?
As an update to this topic, we have contacted the Harmony recovery team presented here Recovery One - Community governance for depegged tokens - Announcements - Harmony Community Forum and we have encouraged them to open the discussion with the Aave community on this forum.
1 Like
Hi all!
I’m Logan with the Recovery ONE committee and I wanted to make sure that each of you had the opportunity to read up on the latest proposals and that you were aware of where the discussion in happening for the Harmony Community here
Recovery One Proposal & Community Submissions (1).pdf (1.2 MB)
Lot of info to cover there. I’m fine with staking an rONE token for 15% return. I am staking now for a 10%. Not a fan of lockups, but I get why. VenomDAO projects is an example of why I am not a fan of lockups. I would like to make sure that my aWONE token (AAVE Wrapped ONE [loans]) are included in the rONE proposal. Thank you for posting this here for us to review. Please post when a vote is up and blast Twitter. Thank you.
2 Likes
@HarmonyVillains Can an optional “Autocompound” feature be added to the smart contract that will allow investors to auto compound the 15% returns without having to do it manually? Maybe a daily autocompound? Maybe select the validator we would like to autocompound with and adjust as we prefer? Check with the openswap team, they have an autocompound feature enabled and I really like it.
this is something that I have brought to the attention of the solidity dev, I agree with it and mentioned it a few weeks ago, but it does also require a greater deal of token inflation to support!
Anybody knows, is there any news regarding this or AAVE pretends dead? Funds are slill locked.
1 Like
I am interested as well what is the current status. Thank you
Scam be careful! Can someone ban this user please?
I’m curious about the outlook or high level timeframe when assets will be unlocked? 2023? 2024? Or later?
2 Likes
As an update for the Aave community, we have been answering the inquiries of the Recovery ONE committee regarding the technical aspects to consider. We would like to transparently post here the key aspects of a potential execution, regarding the Aave smart contracts and assets.
Given that the plan seems to be based on a time-based compensation in the shape of rONE for all affected holders of exploited bridged assets (including those that later on supplied liquidity on Aave), together with potential ad-hoc direct liquidity injection of ONE, we initially identify 2 part for the Recovery ONE to take into account:
-
For ONE depositors on Aave (aWONE holders). The simplest way is for the Recovery ONE committee to deposit ONE on Aave, as any other liquidity provider (their deposit address should be allowed to do so ad-hoc, given the current frozen status). This is technically simpler and convenient in 2 ways:
- It provides a way for current depositors of ONE to withdraw.
- If the Recovery ONE plan to back up the assets works again, it will mean that all the other assets will be backed back to their “normal” price, so liquidation dynamics should work again, and borrowers will, or repay their ONE borrowings to recover more value in collateral, or get liquidated, which leads to same results: all the depositors should be able to withdraw one the assets get backed again, including the Recovery ONE account that deposited the “exit liquidity”. It is important to highlight that the longest the backing up procedure, the more price fluctuations can happen, which could potentially lead to some bad debt, depending on how the assets in process of getting backed up are priced.
-
All assets directly affected by the bridge exploit. The technical dynamics of the Aave pool still hold, given that the price oracle is not pointing to 0, but to the market-broad price of the underlying assets bridged. That means that if the Recovery ONE plan would work, it should not make sense to not repay the borrowings to be able to withdraw the collateral, because the collateral value should be higher (** this depends on market fluctuations happening during the period post-hack). If a user has a value of 3 in collateral and 2 in borrowings, even if now both sides are 0 and 0, if we assume the bridge backing up fully both, the value is 3 and 2, so makes sense to repay the 2 to get the 3.
Given the asymmetric nature of the exploit (assets affected and not), this highly depends on the actions on ONE exit liquidity.
3 Likes
Thank you for the update. Very appreciated.