Arbitrum Proposal: #0x3404df8a6e105dcf8b60cb22f22928aeedd3ffa5d80dc36e4f8fd74d0f5f14cb

Procurement Framework | Security : Non-Constitutional Proposal

Status:
Closed
For89.6%

For: 89.6%

136,281,036 ARB

Against: 1.1%

1,606,852 ARB

Abstain: 9.3%

14,132,017 ARB

Voting Period

  -  

Proposer

0xAD16ebE6FfC7d96624A380F394cD64395B0C6144

Description

Abstract

Creating a procurement framework for security-oriented service providers within the ArbitrumDAO. The proposal aims to create a streamlined & harmonised approach re. service procurement for security-oriented services.

Motivation

Procurement Frameworks maintain quality control, ensuring consistency in the services procured. These frameworks also promote transparency and fairness, building trust and adhering to legal standards. Moreover, they aid in risk management, safeguarding against various procurement-related risks, and streamline processes for time-saving and operational efficiency.

Rationale

This procurement framework is designed to ensure that only qualified and reliable security service providers are selected, thereby safeguarding the integrity and security of the projects within the Arbitrum Ecosystem. This will aid in ensuring that the security-specific needs of projects building within the Ecosystem are safeguarded to a larger extent & thus serve to safeguard the high standards and reputation of the Arbitrum Ecosystem.

Specifications & Timeline

Specifications & Timeline can be found in the following sections.

Steps to Implement

This AIP will move to a Snapshot vote on the 24th of November 2023. Passing of the Snapshot vote will be deemed as a ratification of the Procurement Framework. There are no associated costs with the implementation of the Procurement Framework.

Overall Cost

No cost for AIP implementation.


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The document outlines a comprehensive procurement framework for the Arbitrum Ecosystem, focusing on sourcing and selecting service providers for blockchain security and related services. It comprises several key components:


OVERVIEW

[1] On the 3rd of November, DK (Myself) posted a proposal on the Arbitrum DAO Forums aimed at establishing a framework for security-oriented proposals via a consolidated framework (Consolidate Security Proposals into a RFP Process). By way of a summary, the proposal on the Arbitrum DAO forum discusses establishing a Request for Proposal (RFP) process to consolidate the selection of auditors and security service providers within the Arbitrum ecosystem (for the purposes of this endeavor, we shall be referring to this consolidated framework as the ‘Procurement Framework).

[2] The Snapshot Vote for the establishment of the aforementioned Procurement Framework has since passed (Snapshot 1).

[3] On the 10th of November, Immutablelawyer posted a public consultation period on the Arbitrum Forums (Public Consultation re. 'Consolidate Security Proposals into an RFP Process'). This contained a base-line framework aimed at giving some context to community members & relevant stakeholders intending on participating in the public consultation. The Public Consultation ended on the 22nd of November 2023. Following calls held, submissions received & several discussions with numerous ecosystem participants, we would now like to present the final procurement framework for ratification via Snapshot.

We would like to thank all participants who took their time to provide insight in this endeavor. This was a true testament to the collaborative nature of this ecosystem.

Copy of Proposal in Google Docs: Snapshot Proposal Ratification: Procurement Framework


Procurement Framework for Ratification

1. ‘Needs’ Assessment

1.1. Defining Eligibility Criteria

2. Publication of the Request for Proposal (RFP)

3. Proposal Submission

4. Evaluation of Proposals

5. Whitelisting, Onboarding & Contracting

Ongoing Obligations of the Procurement Committee & Ancillary Matters

[i] Performance Monitoring and Review
[ii] Renewal and Exit Procedures
[iii] Documentation and Record Keeping
[iv] Public Disclosure

We look forward to your final feedback and potentially seeking the framework in action!

Voting

For: Proceed with this framework, start discussions on PC Leadership Against: Do not move forward with this framework, it needs revision