# Strategic reevaluation of legal actions post-security breach and proposal for forward path **URL:** \ **Category:** Discussion\ **Created:** [February 20, 2024, 9:23am UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88 "2024-02-20T09:23:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![starlayvictim9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@starlayvictim9](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/starlayvictim9)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 7:39am UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/22 "2024-02-23T07:39:13Z")
This proposal sounds great,i hope this is what happens my issue is the voting part victims compensation should not be subjected to other parties voting faith as acala user do not hold $Lay please just do right by victims bring more attraction to starlay\_fi and build trust back from the community get official audit using A.I technology it will be a win/win situation instead of a dissolution just learn from the mistake that occured no need for voting @SeiyaChida this proposal from @a797 can it be ideal? ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 1:31pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/23 "2024-02-23T13:31:48Z")
I can’t agree with compensating through a debt token, especially since Starlay’s current revenue is zero. All fees are returned to veLAY holders, and the entire treasury comes from Astar’s dApp staking. Developing a debt token would also take time. Who will develop it, and at what cost? Currently, no one is being compensated for this fee. ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 1:44pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/24 "2024-02-23T13:44:48Z")
The proposal has been updated with details on token distribution options and the allocation from the treasury. Also option4 is added. ---
**Author:** ![a797](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/34f0e0/32.png) [@a797](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/a797)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 2:46pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/25 "2024-02-23T14:46:18Z")
Please consider this option too, DEBT coin can be a part of Starlay 2.0. The Starlay team can expand given that 50% of the treasure is retained and develop 1:1 DEBT:DOT coin protocol. Use 50 % of Dapp staking reward for DOT buyback and issue it to the DEBT coin holders. Burn the DEBT coins once DOT is issued. In the meantime provide $LAY rewards for DEBT coin staking. This mechanism replicates the DEBT coin holders as investors in Starlay. ---
**Author:** ![a797](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/34f0e0/32.png) [@a797](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/a797)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 2:51pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/26 "2024-02-23T14:51:10Z")
Hello Seiya, If the community votes on retaining half treasure, I assume only 1/4 of the lost fund will be compensated. The remaining compensation if planned to be issued via $LAY token can you give an estimate of how to compare the $LAY: DOT. Please let me know if the below consideration about $LAY is correct, - Total max Supply: 1,000,000,000 - Initial Release date: 28th Feb 2022 - Token Released as of 28th Feb 2024: 803,300,000 (80.33%) - Remaining Token to be released: 70,300,000. Based on the Token distribution graph shown in Starlay Token circulation document, from which pool will be the compensation $LAY token be drawn from. ![image](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/uploads/starlay1/original/1X/6ab4fa7580a15da09c8181e1a24da84aa84075ed.png) ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 2:56pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/27 "2024-02-23T14:56:15Z")
As a principle, dApp staking rewards are meant to be used within the Astar ecosystem. Similarly, the ASTR allocated for compensation in this case should ideally be used for the growth of the protocol, and not primarily for compensation purposes. For a detailed discussion and context, it’s advisable to refer to the official Astar forums or documentation. ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 2:59pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/28 "2024-02-23T14:59:17Z")
Please refer to the proposal. It’s not $LAY token but new token. - **Introduction of New Tokens and Evolution Strategy:** The emphasis shifts towards a broader strategy of protocol evolution and community support. The potential for future token issuance, aligned with the rebranding initiative, will be explored in close collaboration with the community. It is crucial that any decision regarding token issuance and the specific mechanics of compensation be ratified through community voting, ensuring alignment with the collective vision and interests of the Starlay stakeholders, however there is high possibility that the users suffered from this time incident would be allocated the new token ---
**Author:** ![Beck](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/forum.starlay.finance/beck/32/6_2.png) [@Beck](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/Beck)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:09pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/29 "2024-02-23T15:09:38Z")
I do not believe it is necessary to provide 100% compensation to users who suffered financial losses on Starlay on Acala. This is because investing assets comes with its risks and returns, and I think it is wrong for the protocol to take on all those risks. On the other hand, option 4, which involves no compensation at all, seems far too irresponsible. If option 4 is chosen, I am considering leaving the Starlay community. ---
**Author:** ![a797](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/34f0e0/32.png) [@a797](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/a797)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:15pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/30 "2024-02-23T15:15:16Z")
Hello Seiya, thanks for the response. Isn’t it fair to say ideally the users are not expecting the protocol to be hacked either? Like how half the current treasury (which only contains ASTAR tokens form Dapp staking rewards) are used for initial compensation, why can’t Starlay going forward use 50% of their Dapp staking rewards to gradually payback the remaining compensation. And once everyone is compensated, Starlay can revert to collecting 100% of the Dapp reward for the growth of the protocol. As seen from the $LAY coin distribution graph, there is also additional revenue for Community Growth total and Team total which adds up for protocol growth revenue I assume. DEBT coin initiative should be not alone seen as compensation coin rather also been seen as users locking in their capital investing in the growth of Starla 2.0. Thank you ![image](https://canada1.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/uploads/starlay1/original/1X/6ab4fa7580a15da09c8181e1a24da84aa84075ed.png) ---
**Author:** ![starlayvictim9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@starlayvictim9](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/starlayvictim9)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:29pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/31 "2024-02-23T15:29:31Z")
no no no option 4 should not be on the table at all it is so unfair not to compensate due to a mistake on the projects fault it is crazy for you to even draw up something like that but you know what the the faith of others financial livelihood lie within yall hand and the voters and i already feel like we will not be compensated ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:38pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/32 "2024-02-23T15:38:12Z")
Using resources that are not ideally meant for compensation, and then further proposing to use more of such resources, might not seem reasonable. Everyone agrees that no one wants the protocol to be hacked, hence the proposal for maximum possible compensation. However, overcompensating might hinder the growth of the protocol, which benefits no one. Proposals that could impede the protocol’s growth should not be accepted outright. Also The graph you mentioned is related to LAY distribution and has no direct relation to revenue. > DEBT coin initiative should be not alone seen as compensation coin rather also been seen as users locking in their capital investing in the growth of Starla 2.0. Thank you I’m not quite sure how this DEBT coin seen as users locking in their capital investing in the growth of Starla 2.0. Rather It seems to me that we are reducing the resources to grow the protocol. Better to allocate new token allocation in the future then. ---
**Author:** ![starlayvictim9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@starlayvictim9](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/starlayvictim9)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:38pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/33 "2024-02-23T15:38:49Z")
you think they really care if you leave the community perhaps the vulnerability was on purpose i was going through reddit and realizing this is not the first hiccup with the team it seems like the hacker is waiting for something to move the $dot tokens ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:44pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/35 "2024-02-23T15:44:56Z")
Please strive for constructive discussions. What you’ve shared is simply an opinion. The forum is meant for engaging in constructive dialogue. Your comments are far away from constructive dialogue. Please check our [Governance and Rule](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/governance-and-rule/21) ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:45pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/36 "2024-02-23T15:45:25Z")
Please strive for constructive discussions. What you’ve shared is simply an opinion. The forum is meant for engaging in constructive dialogue. Your comments are far away from constructive dialogue. Please check our [Governance and Rule](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/governance-and-rule/21). I’ll remove you if you keep breaking our rule. ---
**Author:** ![starlayvictim9](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e19b73/32.png) [@starlayvictim9](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/starlayvictim9)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 3:54pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/37 "2024-02-23T15:54:00Z")
ok big shot you got it ---
**Author:** ![SeiyaChida](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/8e8cbc/32.png) [@SeiyaChida](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/SeiyaChida)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 4:07pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/38 "2024-02-23T16:07:13Z")
Your statements lack substantiation. Please learn how to engage in constructive dialogue before participating in the forum. Additionally, consider revising your English for clarity. ---
**Author:** ![Beck](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/forum.starlay.finance/beck/32/6_2.png) [@Beck](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/Beck)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 4:34pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/39 "2024-02-23T16:34:05Z")
I don’t believe the Starlay team would ever intentionally incorporate vulnerabilities into their product. I have been supporting them as a community member since the inception of the project. They are not the kind of team that would engage in such actions. ---
**Author:** ![JoriZ00553](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/8dc957/32.png) [@JoriZ00553](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/JoriZ00553)\ **Post date:** [February 23, 2024, 7:34pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/40 "2024-02-23T19:34:52Z")
I really don’t see how option 4 is honest in any way… How do we, as few affected, stand any chance to such proposal ? Capitalism at its best. ---
**Author:** ![WheresMyDot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/cdc98d/32.png) [@WheresMyDot](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/WheresMyDot)\ **Post date:** [March 12, 2024, 1:03pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/41 "2024-03-12T13:03:38Z")
Is there any update on this? Also I’m quite confused, but how were the funds hacked? I thought I was staking my DOT through Euphrates on Starlay, not adding liquidity to some pool. I’m not an expert, but as far as I understand staking and adding to liquidity pools are different things. What am I missing here? Finally, who is legally response for this? Acala, Euphrates or Starlay? ---
**Author:** ![WheresMyDot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/cdc98d/32.png) [@WheresMyDot](https://forum.starlay.finance/u/WheresMyDot)\ **Post date:** [August 31, 2025, 12:35pm UTC](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88/42 "2025-08-31T12:35:21Z")
Any update here? Is even anybody here at all? Seriously, all of this is super suspicious, it really looks as if this was a scam from the beginning.. [Previous page](https://forum.starlay.finance/t/strategic-reevaluation-of-legal-actions-post-security-breach-and-proposal-for-forward-path/88.md?page=1)