Request for Information about Disputes #GDR-42

Governance & GIPs
1

The Arbitrators are contacting Indexer address 0xeeeee689aa442c607105f29f06d00d2f748776b2 and fisherman 0xbace05744f1d075ba6bb82ebf561c1c3915f5cd3 for a new dispute filed in the protocol.

Dispute ID: 0x079e54445401cbf3ff5944d80dbc4ce01ae4ba360205805dced280e89b5d809c
Allocation: 0x6716d405cd043a605fbf21e75f6fe93abd812a77
Subgraph: QmTz4HKTBJWSP9LtBZdtDt5WNiyRuooATXR2mSURReto4N

Fisherman, could you share the insights or data you gathered that led to you filing the dispute? Please provide all relevant information and records about the open dispute. This will likely include POIs generated for the affected subgraph(s).

About the Procedure

The Arbitration Charter regulates the arbitration process. You can find it in Radicle project ID rad:git:hnrkrhnth6afcc6mnmtokbp4h9575fgrhzbay or at GIP-0009: Arbitration Charter.

Please use this forum for all communications.

Arbitration Team

2

As mentioned in the GDR-39 post, we were able to find evidence that proves the indexer used another indexer’s PoI when closing the allocation:

      {
        "closedAt": 1752722765,
        "id": "0x6716d405cd043a605fbf21e75f6fe93abd812a77",
        "indexer": {
          "id": "0xeeeee689aa442c607105f29f06d00d2f748776b2"
        },
        "poi": "0x4f8e715ecd3a19f69aaaa901d37331f989fd860d1f9d111872df41f30f31f867"
      },
      {
        "closedAt": 1752703302,
        "id": "0x1c6524165d61c79022374ec0ea365148ee2b8be8",
        "indexer": {
          "id": "0xfc842f81490dcb37e82d416b2d28327dfb24ba9a"
        },
        "poi": "0x4f8e715ecd3a19f69aaaa901d37331f989fd860d1f9d111872df41f30f31f867"
      }

0x4f8e715ecd3a19f69aaaa901d37331f989fd860d1f9d111872df41f30f31f867
for both the disputed indexer and the most recent allocation close before it.

Given this is a new dispute, we’ll give the indexer a small time window to respond to it, otherwise we’ll proceed with accepting the dispute.

Thanks!

1 Like
3

Cheers @juanmardefago! I was just about to respond but you beat me to it :grinning_face:.

Do you have the signature or permission to process the transactions from 39 and 40? I’d be very grateful if both could be resolved swiftly — and then 42 and 43 as well, since both of em looks clear.

4

We’ll try to get the transactions for the ones that have been open for a while processed quickly, but it might take a bit since it does need to go through an approval process. (Hopefully those can be processed today, shouldn’t take longer than that ideally)

Aside from that, 42 and 43 we’ll keep open for a little bit of time just to make sure we allow for some due process.
IMO It’s still highly unlikely the indexer will have a valid explanation for this, but we do need to give some time for it to have a chance to speak regardless.

5

@juanmardefago @tmigone Hopefully the TX clears soon since it’s EOD/week. No reply from grt.stakecn.eth yet.

6

I’m creating and pushing the transactions today, since we already gave plenty of time for any response.

Will update here once they go through!

1 Like
7

Just initiated another dispute on grt.stakecn.eth.

They cloned POI from streamingfastindexer.eth again. I’ll wait for 44, but honestly no details needed as it’s obvious and a clear breach.

Cheers !

1 Like
8

Yeah, just created the thread. If you can include the findings that’d be great, I’ll double check them as soon as I have some spare time.

Thanks!

9

Dispute was accepted here: Arbitrum One Transaction Hash: 0x2a04cea792... | Arbitrum One