defirisk.co
rubric v1.7.0

Multisig signers co-hosted

A governance & admin factor in the v1.7.0 rubric. Measured per protocol on a s cadence.

Methodology how we score #

**What this measures** This factor assesses whether the signers of a protocol's governance multisig are co-hosted — sharing the same autonomous system number, data center, cloud provider, or custodian. The assessment combines on-chain address analysis (network fingerprints from signing transactions) with OSINT on the addresses' activity patterns. Co-hosting means that a single infrastructure compromise could simultaneously expose multiple signer keys, collapsing the effective threshold.

**Why it matters** The security guarantee of a 3-of-5 multisig depends entirely on the independence of the five signing parties. If three of those signers operate on the same cloud infrastructure or with the same custodian, a single breach of that provider collapses the 3-of-5 to a practical 0-of-2 recovery problem. The evidence base includes cases where hardware co-location with a compromised vendor reduced an apparently robust multisig to a single-point-of-failure. This factor is particularly relevant for protocols that disclose their signer list publicly — the co-hosting analysis can then be performed at the address level using on-chain transaction metadata.

**Green / Yellow / Red** Green is assigned when signers are demonstrably distributed across different cloud providers or custody solutions and no co-hosting signals appear in on-chain data. Yellow covers cases where partial co-hosting is suspected but unconfirmed, or where signer distribution is not publicly verifiable. Red is assigned when on-chain or OSINT evidence confirms that a quorum-forming set of signers share the same infrastructure or custodian.

**Common gray cases** This factor is grayed when the signer list is not public and on-chain inference is inconclusive — a common state for protocols that do not publish their multisig composition.

**Notable historical examples** No cross-hacked incidents currently linked in database for this factor.

Measurement what to look for #

Determine whether multisig signers share ASN / data-center / custodian according to on-chain and OSINT inference.

Data & output #

Data source
Chainalysis/TRM cluster feed for signer addresses + ASN lookup on signing IP patterns (OSINT) + curator assessment
Output format
Green / Yellow / Red
Evidence artifact
Signer address list + ASN/custodian inference per signer + curator note
Confidence signal
green = signers demonstrably on independent infrastructure; yellow = partial evidence of co-hosting or insufficient data; red = confirmed co-hosting (same ASN or same custodian for majority); gray = cannot infer from available data

Scored protocols 80 carry this factor #

Protocol RD-F-029
Aave v3 ethereum green Across Protocol ethereum gray Aerodrome Finance base gray Axelar Network ethereum gray Babylon Protocol bitcoin yellow Balancer (v2 + v3) ethereum gray Beefy Finance ethereum gray BENQI avalanche gray BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL) ethereum gray Cap (cUSD / stcUSD) ethereum gray Centrifuge ethereum gray Chainlink CCIP ethereum gray Circle USYC binance not_applicable Compound V3 (Comet) ethereum gray Concrete ethereum gray Convex Finance ethereum gray crvUSD (Curve Stablecoin) ethereum gray Curve Finance ethereum yellow deBridge ethereum gray Dolomite ethereum gray dYdX v4 (dYdX Chain) dydx green EigenLayer ethereum yellow Ethena ethereum yellow ether.fi ethereum gray Euler V2 ethereum yellow Falcon Finance ethereum gray Fluid ethereum gray Frax Finance ethereum yellow GMX v2 (GMX Synthetics) arbitrum gray Hyperlane ethereum gray Hyperliquid arbitrum yellow Jito solana gray Jupiter solana yellow Jupiter Perpetual Exchange solana not_assessed JustLend DAO tron not_applicable Kamino Lend solana gray Kinetiq hyperliquid gray Lido ethereum gray Liquid Collective (LsETH) ethereum gray Liquity V1 + V2 (LUSD / BOLD) ethereum not_applicable Lista DAO bsc gray Lombard Finance ethereum gray M^0 ethereum not_applicable Maple Finance ethereum yellow Marinade Finance solana green Meteora solana gray mETH Protocol ethereum gray Midas ethereum gray Morpho V1 (Morpho Blue + MetaMorpho) ethereum gray Multipli ethereum not_applicable Ondo Finance ethereum gray OpenEden ethereum gray Orca solana gray PancakeSwap bsc gray Pendle Finance ethereum gray Polymarket polygon gray QuickSwap polygon yellow Raydium solana yellow Rocket Pool ethereum green Sanctum solana gray Save (formerly Solend) solana gray Sky Lending (formerly MakerDAO) ethereum gray Spark Protocol ethereum gray Spiko stellar gray Stake DAO ethereum gray StakeWise v3 ethereum gray Stargate Finance ethereum gray stHYPE (Valantis Labs) hyperliquid gray SUNSwap (sun.io) tron not_applicable Superstate ethereum not_applicable Sushi (SushiSwap) — v2 + v3 + Trident + BentoBox/Kashi + SushiXSwap ethereum gray Symbiotic ethereum gray Synapse Protocol ethereum not_assessed Uniswap (v2 + v3) ethereum not_applicable USDD (Decentralized USD) tron not_applicable Usual (USD0 / bUSD0 / USUAL) ethereum gray Veda (BoringVault) ethereum gray Venus Protocol bsc gray Wormhole ethereum gray Yearn Finance ethereum yellow

Linked hacks no historical incidents linked #

No historical incidents are linked to this factor.
rubric_version v1.7.0 factor RD-F-029 category 2 carried 80 critical no