Vote Proxy

A smart contract registry that maps a delegator's address to a chosen proxy address. This is a simple, one-to-one mapping system.

• How it works: A user calls a function like delegate(address to) to set their delegate. The governance contract reads from this registry to determine voting power.
• Example: Compound's Governor Bravo uses a delegation model where COMP token holders delegate to an address, which then has the exclusive right to cast votes on their behalf.
• Key Trait: The delegate gains full control over the voting power; the delegator cannot vote directly while delegated.

A system allowing a token holder to split their voting power among multiple delegates or retain a portion for personal use.

• How it works: Instead of an all-or-nothing delegation, a user can specify that 50% of their voting power goes to Delegate A, 30% to Delegate B, and keep 20% to vote themselves.
• Example: The Element Finance governance system pioneered this model, enabling more nuanced expression of voter intent.
• Key Trait: Increases flexibility and allows for hedging strategies or supporting multiple initiatives proportionally.

A smart contract, not an EOA, acts as the voting delegate. This contract can encode complex, automated voting logic.

• How it works: Users delegate to the contract's address. The contract's code determines how to vote, potentially based on on-chain data, price oracles, or the outcome of an internal vote among its own stakeholders.
• Examples: Index Coop's IIP-XX or Yearn's yChad contract. These are often used by DAOs or investment collectives.
• Key Trait: Enables programmable, rule-based voting without continuous human intervention.

A model where the right to vote as a delegate is tokenized into a transferable NFT or fungible token, creating a market for governance influence.

• How it works: When a user delegates, they receive a delegation NFT representing the claim to that voting power. This NFT can be sold or transferred, dynamically changing who the effective delegate is.
• Example: Uniswap's 'Delegation V2' explored this concept, though it is not yet widely deployed on mainnet.
• Key Trait: Creates a secondary market for governance power, potentially improving delegate accountability and participation.

A hierarchical system where a top-level delegate can further delegate received voting power to other sub-delegates, forming a delegation tree.

• How it works: If Alice delegates to Bob, and Bob (as a delegate) can then delegate a portion of the aggregated power to Charlie. The governance contract must sum voting power through this tree.
• Complexity: Requires more complex state management and can introduce latency in vote power calculation.
• Key Trait: Allows for the creation of specialized delegate structures, similar to representative democracies with local and national representatives.

Delegation that is bound for a minimum period or until a specific condition is met, reducing volatility in delegate composition.

• How it works: When a user delegates, their voting power is locked with that delegate for a set period (e.g., 3 months). This prevents rapid, tactical re-delegation around individual proposals.
• Purpose: Promotes long-term alignment and gives delegates a stable base of power to make strategic plans. It discourages vote-buying for single proposals.
• Key Trait: Introduces temporal constraints to increase governance stability and delegate commitment.

The core security of a vote proxy depends on the integrity of its smart contract code. Vulnerabilities such as reentrancy, access control flaws, or logic errors could allow an attacker to:

• Hijack delegated voting power for malicious proposals.
• Permanently lock or steal the underlying tokens.
• Manipulate vote execution timing. A rigorous, public audit by reputable firms is the minimum standard for mitigating this risk.

Delegating voting power requires placing significant trust in the delegatee (the recipient of the proxy). The token holder must trust that the delegate will:

• Vote competently in the delegator's best interest.
• Remain active and informed on governance matters.
• Not engage in malicious voting (e.g., voting for proposals that drain the treasury). This is a social and reputational trust model, as the smart contract typically cannot enforce these behaviors.

A secure vote proxy must provide a clear, reliable, and timely method for the delegator to revoke their delegated power. Key considerations include:

• Self-custody revocation: The original token holder can always reclaim voting rights without the delegate's permission.
• Timelocks vs. Instant: Some systems enforce a timelock on revocation to prevent last-minute manipulation, while others allow instant reclaim.
• Front-running risks: The design must protect against malicious delegates front-running a revocation transaction to cast a final, unwanted vote.

Some advanced governance systems implement slashing mechanisms to penalize malicious or negligent delegates. This introduces economic security but adds complexity.

• Slashing conditions must be programmatically verifiable (e.g., double-voting, voting for a maliciously coded proposal).
• Slashing risk transfers some economic risk to the delegate, potentially aligning incentives.
• Dispute resolution becomes critical, as false positives in slashing can unfairly penalize honest delegates.

Proxy voting creates a tension between privacy and necessary transparency.

• On-chain transparency: All proxy delegations and votes are public, allowing for accountability and analysis of delegate behavior.
• Lack of privacy: This can lead to vote buying or coercion, as delegations are visible.
• Sybil resistance: Transparent delegation helps analyze voting power concentration but does not inherently prevent Sybil attacks (creating many fake identities); this is often handled at the token or governance framework level.

A vote proxy does not operate in isolation; its security is intertwined with the broader DeFi and governance ecosystem.

• Oracle dependencies: If voting on parameter changes relies on price oracles, proxy security is linked to oracle security.
• Governance token volatility: The economic value of the delegated power fluctuates with the token's price.
• Protocol upgrades: Changes to the underlying governance contract could inadvertently break or alter the proxy's security guarantees.