GIP-17: Should Gnosis DAO upgrade the Gnosis DAO Safe AND create a separate Safe for Active Treasury Management ๐Ÿ‘ฉโ€๐ŸŒพ?

GIP-17: Should Gnosis DAO upgrade the Gnosis DAO Safe AND create a separate Safe for Active Treasury Management :woman_farmer:?

  • Letโ€™s do this!
  • Make no changes

0 voters

GIP: 17
title: Should Gnosis DAO upgrade the Gnosis DAO Safe AND create a separate Safe for Active Treasury Management ๐Ÿ‘ฉโ€๐ŸŒพ?
author: Friederike Ernst 
status: Phase 3
type: Meta
created: 2021-11-26

Snapshot Proposal

Live Dec 14, 10 pm CET โ€“ Dec 21, 11 pm CET

[Note that I made a mistake in the payload and had to restart the snapshot proposal โ€“ 20k ETH from the Gnosis DAO were used in the Gnosis DAO GNO auction that was part of the amended GIP-16/ Gnosis Chain proposal. I did not subtract these 20k ETH from the total ETH to be transferred, despite the fact that they are no longer available. This would have cause the entire transaction batch to revert. Thanks to @Richard for spotting this.]

Simple Summary

Gnosis Ltd has started the transfer of assets to the DAO. Proposal to set up a dedicated active treasury management Safe for the DAO. Further proposal to update the Gnosis DAO Safe from Contract Version 1.1.1 to 1.3.0.


In the past, Gnosis Ltd has yield farmed with its funds. Gnosis Ltd continued this practice after the DAO announcement last November in which Gnosis Ltd. announced the transfer 150k ETH and 8m GNO to the DAO. The transfer of 150k ETH was held up by legal and corporate issues. Since then, the 150k ETH earmarked for the DAO have proliferated to a total transferable sum of close to 180k ETH equivalent. This transfer is currently underway.


We propose that the Gnosis DAO Safe be upgraded from version 1.1.1 to 1.3.0 to enable the transfer for UNIV3 NFTs that currently cannot be sent from the Gnosis Ltd Safe.

We furthermore assume that Gnosis DAO will continue to actively use its treasury to optimize yields. The average number of transactions executed for the Gnosis Ltd yield farming strategy was around 50 per week. To continue this, Gnosis DAO shall set up another Safe โ€˜Gnosis DAO Active Treasury Safeโ€™ of which the Gnosis DAO is the only signer and added as a module. Gnosis DAO shall then add the Gnosis DAO signers to the Active Treasury Safe and transfer the funds earmarked for yield farming to this Safe.


The dedicated yield farming Safe ought to exist for two main reasons

  1. OpSec: There will be proposals for treasury management from external parties. While they should never have custody, these persons/ DAOs need permission to initialize transactions on this wallet. Consequently, it seems advisable to set up a specific wallet and give the treasury advisers permissions on this wallet only.
  2. Transparency: I assume the DAO will also want to undertake other actions (e.g. giving grants, incentivizing certain behaviors through token programs, maybe burning tokens, voting in other DAOs). For transparencyโ€™s sake, these should be reasonably separated out from one another.


  1. Upgrade Gnosis DAO Safe contracts to 1.3.0
  2. Create a daughter Safe for active treasury management
  3. Transfer the following funds to the new active treasury management Safe

GnosisDAO Snapshot

Phase 2 Proposals: Please ignore this section, and leave as is. It is used for Phase 3 proposals.
Phase 3 Proposals: Add a link to the corresponding GnosisDAO Snapshot poll youโ€™ve created.


Two questions regarding this:

  1. do you have some preliminary proposal for who to add as a signer to the โ€˜Active Treasury Safeโ€™ and how to balance speed of execution and capitalizing on opportunities vs custody and safety of the setup?

  2. What do you mean by โ€œof which Gnosis DAO is the only signer and added as a moduleโ€

  1. No, this proposal is agnostic to the exact setup โ€“ it is clear the DAO should never lose custody, but other than that this should be addressed in the proposal for treasury management since the exact setup depends on the specific proposal. I do fully expect this to be discussed thoroughly before a treasury management proposal is passed. This proposal just takes care there is a frame for this.
  2. Itโ€™s a way of giving one signer (in this case, the DAO), admin access. You can check out this explainer written by Lukas.
1 Like

It might make sense to add the concrete payloads to this proposal, so that it is clear for phase-3 what is required.

A proposal:

The DAO Safe should execute a multisend transaction using the multisend at 0xA238CBeb142c10Ef7Ad8442C6D1f9E89e07e7761 to execute 4 transactions:

Template to be used with safe-tasks to generate the to, value, data, operation of the Module tx:

(Note: run yarn safe propose-multi 0DA0C3e52C977Ed3cBc641fF02DD271c3ED55aFe dao_safe_gip_17_module_tx_template.json --on-chain-hash with safe-tasks to get transaction data)

Module tx:


Decoding of data:โ€ฆ

Collection of Safe related addresses:



Another thing to consider would be to create a proposal to write a guard that prevents the removal of modules, which then could be enabled as a fifth transaction.

In addition to @Richard 's proposal, we should also add the funds transfer transactions.

Template to be used with safe-tasks to generate the to , value , data , operation of the Module tx: gnosis_dao_safe_gip_17_module_tx_template.json



Thank you, @Richard and @giacomolicari.

I just created the snapshot proposal โ€“ will go live at 10 pm CET.