search

safe-global / safe-wallet-web

Safe{Wallet} – smart account wallet
https://app.safe.global
GNU General Public License v3.0
358 stars 429 forks source link

Optionality of risk warnings and non-default compliance warnings #3026

Open johannesmoormann opened 11 months ago

johannesmoormann commented 11 months ago

What is the feature about

While risk warning by a third-party provider should be enabled by default to protect the user, the option should exist in the settings to deactivate that feature for privacy or other reasons. Additionally, country/region specific compliance warnings should be optional and non-default or removed all along.

The list of requirements

toggle for risk checks (default: on) toggle for compliance warnings (default: off)

tbd with third party

Designs/sketches

Links

MicahZoltu commented 11 months ago

While I do believe that for privacy reasons these third party providers should be opt-in, or at least disablable, that isn't my main concern. The bigger issue IMO is that these providers are incorrectly labeling some accounts as a compliance risk. As a community, we should be advocating for broad usage of crypto and encouraging the usage of privacy software whenever it is legal for the user to do so. At the moment, the currently selected providers are discouraging interactions between users where the interaction would be entirely legal.

Specifically, there are two problems:

  1. Tornado.cash is only illegal to use in the US (I believe). In the rest of the world it is still legal to use.
  2. It is perfectly legal to interact with an address that has used Tornado.cash, even in the US.

Redefine is warning users about a compliance risk when they try to send assets to an address that has used Tornado.cash in the past, and this is just fear mongering that is discouraging people from using privacy software. Either such warnings should be filtered out of the UI (as in #3015), or Gnosis should convince Redefine that their warning is in appropriate and needs to be removed, or Gnosis should stop using Redefine as a provider. My vote is the third option as I think the crypto community should be actively boycotting providers like Redefine who are spreading FUD like this, but either of the other two would be reasonable solutions as well.

Note: It is important that the fix for this isn't just something people can toggle off. The problem here is that people trust Gnosis to give informed recommendations when surfacing risks, and the majority of people will blindly follow whatever risk warnings the Gnosis UI shows. For example, if I am an employee of a company that uses Gnosis SAFE and I use Tornado to protect my privacy, when my employer (who may not understand the current financial privacy legal landscape) tries to send me money they will get a warning telling them that I am a compliance risk. The company may choose to simply let me go as it isn't worth it to them to take on compliance risk. They aren't necessarily going to dig into the issue and understand that this is a false positive, they'll do exactly what banks do today and simply kick me out and hire someone else.

If we want people innocent civilians from countries like Venezuala to be able to engage in the global economy, we need to take a very aggressive stance against any provider who incorrectly demonizes people as "compliance risks" who are not. Really these tools shouldn't be included in the UI at all, as we should be advocating for a truly open and permissionless financial system, but in this case I have given up on lobbying for that and instead am just lobbying for correcting these false positives.