[RFC] Addressing the Loss of 326M SPELL on Avalanche Due to Multichain Exploit on July 2023

[RFC] - Addressing the Loss of 326M SPELL on Avalanche Due to Multichain Exploit

Updated RFC here: [RFC] Addressing the Loss of 326M SPELL on Avalanche Due to Multichain Exploit on July 2023 - #10 by Digman

Original RFC

Summary/Scope:

This RFC proposes that the Abracadabra DAO formally recognize the ~326 million SPELL tokens stranded on Avalanche due to the Multichain.xyz bridge exploit, and initiate a remediation process for affected holders. We suggest the DAO consider a 1:1 replacement, a Merkle-claim redemption system, or an equivalent token burn to preserve trust, supply integrity, and user value.

Reference:

Main Objective

High-Level Overview

The Multichain.xyz exploit has rendered cross-chain SPELL on Avalanche permanently inaccessible. Many community members, including the proposer, lost access to their SPELL tokens, which are now effectively frozen in a defunct contract.

This RFC aims to begin discussion around a fair, secure, and technically feasible response from the DAO, such as:

  • A 1:1 replacement of affected tokens via claim
  • A Merkle-claim contract for users to redeem a replacement SPELL on Ethereum
  • A burn or marking system to neutralize stranded SPELL in Avalanche supply
  • An official DAO acknowledgment of the incident and its effect on tokenomics

Low-Level Options to Discuss

  • Use a Merkle tree-based claim system to let users redeem SPELL on Ethereum
  • Consider a burn (or marking as invalid) of the frozen tokens to prevent supply distortion
  • Alternatively, mint new SPELL to compensate losses — transparently, fairly, and with DAO oversight

Motivation and Risk Analysis

Motivation:

  • Restore value to loyal SPELL holders affected through no fault of their own
  • Strengthen trust in Abracadabra’s governance and token integrity
  • Prevent long-term inflated supply metrics by addressing these frozen assets

Risks:

  • Implementation complexity (Merkle system)
  • Potential for fraud (mitigated by chain-level data)
  • Setting a precedent for future recovery demands
  • Minor supply inflation if no burn is performed

Contracts / Technical Requirements

5 Likes

I’m in favor of this but I think it should be updated to include all impacted chains like Fantom.

Also, there’s a few details of the post that should be fixed such as the contract address: 0xCE1bFFBD5374Dac86a2893119683F4911a2F7814 and the amount of SPELL on Avalanche: 1,515,746,055.35

3 Likes

Agreed, let’s fix all at the same time. I’m stranded with SPELL on Fantom.

1 Like

This needs to include Fantom as well, particularly as Fantom SPELL holders have been cut off from mSPELL rewards permanently and are now at a greater disadvantage even to other multi chain affected chains. The DAO can’t ignore that multichain was the official bridge for Abracadabra. If receipt tokens are burnt on claim on Avax/FTM etc. there is minimal inflation risk (which could be offset by a burn on ETH anyway). It’s fair to say that if the locked tokens were accessible by an exploiter they would have been accessed and dumped by now.

2 Likes

Yes, please rewrite with fantom added.

Hello!

Any news regarding this?

Let’s see this move forward.

Sure, no problem. So, should I remove the one at post and replace it with 0xCE1bFFBD5374Dac86a2893119683F4911a2F7814?

Not sure what to write about Fantom or how to find the contact address affected. Can u write a small paragraph, whatever feels right, so I can edit and include it in the post?

Thanks

1 Like

Yea, I think that would be best. The affected tokens are:

Avax:
SPELL: 0xce1bffbd5374dac86a2893119683f4911a2f7814
sSPELL: 0x3Ee97d514BBef95a2f110e6B9b73824719030f7a

Fantom:
SPELL: 0x468003b688943977e6130f4f68f23aad939a1040
sSPELL: 0xbB29D2A58d880Af8AA5859e30470134dEAf84F2B

BSC:
SPELL: 0x9fe28d11ce29e340b7124c493f59607cbab9ce48
sSPELL: 0x66eff5221ca926636224650fd3b9c497ff828f7d

Arbitrum:
sSPELL: 0xf7428ffcb2581a2804998efbb036a43255c8a8d3

Optimism:
SPELL: 0xe3ab61371ecc88534c522922a026f2296116c109

2 Likes

Hey Admin, pls edit my thread above using the post below.. For some reason, I cannot edit my thread.

[RFC] - Addressing the Loss of SPELL and sSPELL Tokens Across Multiple Chains Due to Multichain Exploit

Summary/Scope: This RFC proposes that the Abracadabra DAO formally recognize the SPELL and sSPELL tokens stranded across multiple chains due to the Multichain.xyz bridge exploit, and initiate a remediation process for affected holders. We suggest the DAO consider a 1:1 replacement, a Merkle-claim redemption system, or an equivalent token burn to preserve trust, supply integrity, and user value.

Reference:

Affected Token Contracts:

  • Avalanche:
    • SPELL: 0xce1bffbd5374dac86a2893119683f4911a2f7814
    • sSPELL: 0x3Ee97d514BBef95a2f110e6B9b73824719030f7a
  • Fantom:
    • SPELL: 0x468003b688943977e6130f4f68f23aad939a1040
    • sSPELL: 0xbB29D2A58d880Af8AA5859e30470134dEAf84F2B
  • BSC:
    • SPELL: 0x9fe28d11ce29e340b7124c493f59607cbab9ce48
    • sSPELL: 0x66eff5221ca926636224650fd3b9c497ff828f7d
  • Arbitrum:
    • sSPELL: 0xf7428ffcb2581a2804998efbb036a43255c8a8d3
  • Optimism:
    • SPELL: 0xe3ab61371ecc88534c522922a026f2296116c109

Main Objective

High-Level Overview The Multichain.xyz exploit has rendered cross-chain SPELL and sSPELL tokens permanently inaccessible across multiple chains including Avalanche, Fantom, BSC, Arbitrum, and Optimism. Many community members lost access to their tokens, which are now effectively frozen in defunct contracts.

This RFC aims to begin discussion around a fair, secure, and technically feasible response from the DAO, such as:

  • A 1:1 replacement of affected tokens via claim
  • A Merkle-claim contract for users to redeem replacement SPELL/sSPELL on Ethereum
  • A burn or marking system to neutralize stranded tokens across all affected chains
  • An official DAO acknowledgment of the incident and its effect on tokenomics

Low-Level Options to Discuss

  • Use a Merkle tree-based claim system to let users redeem SPELL/sSPELL on Ethereum
  • Consider a burn (or marking as invalid) of the frozen tokens to prevent supply distortion
  • Alternatively, mint new tokens to compensate losses — transparently, fairly, and with DAO oversight
  • Address both SPELL and sSPELL holders across all affected chains

Motivation and Risk Analysis

Motivation:

  • Restore value to loyal SPELL and sSPELL holders affected through no fault of their own
  • Strengthen trust in Abracadabra’s governance and token integrity
  • Prevent long-term inflated supply metrics by addressing these frozen assets across multiple chains
  • Ensure fair treatment for both SPELL and sSPELL holders

Risks:

  • Implementation complexity (Merkle system across multiple chains and token types)
  • Potential for fraud (mitigated by chain-level data)
  • Setting a precedent for future recovery demands
  • Minor supply inflation if no burn is performed
  • Additional complexity due to multiple token types (SPELL vs sSPELL)

Contracts / Technical Requirements

  • Affected token contracts listed above across 5 chains
  • Suggested tools:
    • Merkle claim distributor (similar to Uniswap, Gitcoin)
    • Deployment of claim contract on Ethereum
    • Multi-chain snapshot capability to capture balances across all affected chains
    • Consideration for sSPELL conversion ratios if applicable
2 Likes