Reverse Governance Attacks

1

Firstly, lets define the word Attack in a way thats relevant.

"The word attack refers to an aggressive action aimed at causing harm or damage to someone or something. It can also mean a verbal or written criticism intended to discredit or undermine someone or an idea. In broader contexts, such as cybersecurity or strategy, an attack is any deliberate effort to breach defenses, systems, or protocols to achieve a harmful objective"

Now lets discuss, Reverse Governance Attacks

A reverse governance attack reverse governance attack refers to a situation in a decentralised autonomous organisation (DAO) where the governance process is manipulated or exploited to harm the protocol or its community. Whether intentional or not, these actions focus on undermining the governance process or steering sentiment in a way that weakens the DAO’s governance from within.

In some cases, attackers may simply disagree with the DAO’s governance decisions or strategic direction. Their actions are aimed at influencing the governance process to reflect their personal or ideological views, rather than the collective interests of the DAO.

In a typical Governance Attack, bad actors acquire a majority of governance tokens or voting power to make malicious proposals or pass harmful votes.

In contrast, a Reverse Governance Attack involves more subtle strategies, such as:

  1. Influencing Key Proposals: In a reverse governance attack, malicious actors may introduce or heavily support governance proposals that seem to align with the DAO’s interests but are actually crafted to serve their own hidden agenda long term. These proposals are designed to subtly divert resources away from the DAO and its Treasury, redirecting funds to support their own projects or services. Over time, this approach weakens the governance structure and drains the protocol’s resources, ultimately leaving the organisation vulnerable and destabilised.

  2. Manipulating Voting Power: By fostering disputes or disagreements among community members, attackers can create factions within the DAO. These factions may have conflicting interests, making it harder to achieve unified decisions and slowing down the governance process. This fragmentation can lead to inefficiencies and conflicts that undermine the DAO’s ability to function effectively.

  3. Discrediting or Disempowering Key Members: Attackers may focus on influential or respected members within the DAO who play a significant role in the decision-making process. By discrediting or marginalising these key figures, attackers create division and confusion.

Here is a prime example RESCINDED [Board Candidate] Tom Lombardi’s Platform Statement

This fragmentation can prevent the community from reaching consensus on important matters, weakening the overall governance structure.

  1. Deliberate Miscommunication: Attackers may disseminate false or misleading information to confuse voters and influence their decisions. This can lead to votes being cast based on inaccurate or biased information, affecting the outcome of governance decisions and ultimately harming the DAO

The end goal of a reverse governance attack is not immediate control but rather the gradual weakening or destabilisation of the project, making it more susceptible to further attacks or manipulation.

Regardless of the underlying motives of those potentially to undermine the DAO’s governance structure, their actions clearly do not prioritise the protocol’s best interests. Instead, they are focused on advancing their own agendas, often without concern for the potential harm they cause.