Large governance proposal queued
Liquid Collective (LsETH)'s assessment for RD-F-101 — scored yellow on the v1.7.0 rubric. The evidence below is the curator's reasoning for this score.
Evidence summary #
T-09 v1 launch signal; tier-B. No on-chain Governor contract exists (governance.governor_address = null); governance is multisig-only via three Gnosis Safes. The signal's ProposalCreated/ProposalQueued event trigger is permanently inapplicable in this architecture -- no proposal queue exists. The spirit of the signal (detecting admin-role changes, upgrade transactions, and governance-weakening events) is applicable but requires RD-F-102 (mempool) rather than RD-F-101 (event-driven) as the detection mechanism. This creates a structural signal-coverage gap: no advance warning of admin changes is possible via RD-F-101. Score is yellow rather than not_applicable because the underlying risk class is real and material at $767M TVS -- the gap is architectural, not a passing test.
Sources #
- InternalLiquid Collective data cache - governance fields00-data-cache.json governance.governor_address = null; governance.type = 'multisig_only'; governance.timelock_address = null; safe_multisigs[0] role = proxy_admin threshold=4/7retrieved 2026-05-17
- Architecture Overview - Liquid Collective ETHProtocol documentation states intent to issue TLC governance token but token-based governance is not yet active; three Gnosis Safes govern the protocolretrieved 2026-05-17
Methodology #
Detect whether a governance proposal with potentially protocol-impactful payload has been queued for execution (including Security-Council threshold-reduction variant).
See the full factor methodology and distribution across all protocols →