Discussion Regarding Priorities (Re-Posted)

[Loring]

Introduction

In the past few days, brainbot has received feedback from members of Shutter DAO 0x36 and the broader ecosystem regarding the future of the Shutter project.

We note that significant differences exist:

• Some members wish to focus on long term impact and profit by pursuing encrypted mempools on Ethereum L1
• Other members wish to focus on immediate opportunities for revenue generation via the Shutter API
• Other members wish to double down on cryptography research, and still others wish to launch a protocol with no/little maintenance costs

We believe that an open and constructive discussion would benefit all Shutter ecosystem actors, including brainbot and Shutter DAO 0x36.

Among other benefits, it would help Shutter DAO 0x36 right-size the grant(s) to brainbot and extend its runway (if it so wishes).

In order to kickstart the conversation, brainbot has outlined 6 potential options. The Shutter ecosystem may wish to prioritise one, a combination, or none of these options.

Please feel free to share other options, comments and questions. We look forward to the discussion!

Options

1. Encrypted Mempool

Vitalik’s vision for the future of Ethereum included an encrypted mempool as one key component. This would help address the rising threat of censorship and MEV extraction through builder centralization on Ethereum. Shutter already proves its capability with a live deployment on Gnosis Chain (probably the first threshold encrypted mempool on a mainnet in general) and has a clear roadmap toward integrating encrypted mempool functionality into Ethereum’s transaction pipeline (by leveraging proposer commitments and later FOCIL). By positioning itself as a key player in the “holy trinity” of censorship resistance—alongside ePBS and FOCIL—Shutter can capture a massive market share where the payoff, in both security and financial terms, is immense. This strategy leverages real market demand for decentralized, censorship-proof transaction processing and promises a strong competitive edge.

2. Shutter API – Focus on Encryption/Decryption

The Shutter API offers seamless access to robust threshold encryption and decryption services, making it easy for developers to integrate privacy features like commit-reveal mechanisms and time-lock encryption. This strategy leverages Shutter’s core competence, addressing the immediate demand for secure, censorship-resistant applications. By focusing on encryption/decryption, Shutter can quickly capture market share in gaming, decentralized governance, finance, and more.

3. Shutter API – MPC/Threshold Crypto-Based Custody/Bridging Use Cases

This approach extends the API to integrate threshold cryptography and multi-party computation (MPC) for secure custody and bridging across blockchains (see NEAR intents). It targets broader applications such as decentralized finance and cross-chain asset management, opening new revenue streams despite facing tougher competition from established players. By combining privacy with advanced custody solutions, Shutter can position itself as a key enabler in the evolving blockchain ecosystem.

4. Decentralized MEV Solution

Current solutions like Flashbots Protect mitigate MEV extraction but still suffer from elements of centralization that threaten market fairness and neutrality. Shutter can develop a private mempool alternative that offers a more decentralized approach, ensuring that transactions remain private until inclusion and eliminating exploitable front-running opportunities. This approach not only safeguards user interests but also positions Shutter as a pioneer in creating a truly trustless and censorship-resistant ecosystem. With MEV extraction representing a multi-billion dollar problem in blockchain markets, a robust decentralized solution could unlock tremendous market potential and redefine transaction security standards.

5. Threshold KMS (for FHE)

The advent of fully homomorphic encryption (FHE) marks the next phase of privacy for Ethereum and public blockchains. But for FHE to work, one still needs decryption (to use the outputs) and threshold key management. Shutter’s core strength - its threshold encryption DKG - positions it perfectly to offer a Threshold KMS that bridges this gap, especially as projects like Zama and Enclave are hinting at similar needs (Zama already mentions a threshold KMS as “coming soon” on its website). Integrating Shutter’s KMS with FHE-based systems can unlock the holy grail of privacy: full privacy combined with auditability and transparency. The market potential here is significant as demand surges for secure, programmable cryptography solutions across finance, governance, and beyond.

6. In-House MPC/Threshold-FHE System

Shutter’s existing threshold encryption can be the foundation for a more advanced system that computes over encrypted data, aligning with the emerging paradigm of programmable cryptography. By developing its own MPC/threshold-FHE framework, Shutter can address the dual challenge of full privacy and verifiable computation on public blockchains. Although the technical hurdles are significant and the competition from projects like Zama and Nillion is fierce, success in this area would position Shutter at the forefront of a rapidly expanding market. This innovation could drive new applications across industries that demand uncompromised data security and transparency.

[han]

Hi Loring,

now it is not the time to ask for new priorities (I hope this is not a subtle way to reintroduce more grant program)

But answer the question:

how does Brainbot plan to reduce the Brainbot’s cost on DAO treasury and make sure your deliverable sustains the DAO’s future with increased transparency and accountability.

This is what everyone have asked and you have mentioned your post. We believe brainbot has intention to delivery that and will be waiting for the new plan

[d0z3y]

Refining the roadmap and priorities is a key part of managing costs. The two should be done in tandem.

[0xjakub]

The current content in the post assumes that the problem is only the approach to technical options and product assumptions. This is, of course, very important, but in my opinion the problem is not in the ultimate goal, but in the execution.

Shutter like 90% of the projects in the crypto space is looking for its PMF and has an obvious right to pursue it without yet receiving revenue for it through lack of users.

The obvious matter, is the pursuit to PMF through crypto native activities when having such a large budget as $230K - $250K per month. Crypto native activities are a must because it is only through them that we will get to the point where the price of the token will follow the general market trend, and right now connecting the case of Shutter with dumping market does not make sense since the only place where SHU follows is hell.

With such a large budget, the obvious things should be:

• Hiring a crypto native CMO or agency
• Listing the token on CEXs
• Continuously engaging the community, rather than throwing in a post with an announcement and hoping for a sentiment rebound
• Fast pivoting - it’s the fastest industry in the world and if something doesn’t work, you just have to change it
• Hiring a professional market maker

Legal matters related to the above should not be a problem with such a large budget considering that any other crypto project is able to handle this with much less funds.

[acidbird]

fact: majority agreed that the amount of money Brainbot spends monthly is excessive and not reasonable.

the proper proposal from Brainbot should be something like “guys, we hear you, we are happy to lower the budget to 100k” or whatever amount you think is reasonable. You can even post a snapshot vote with options, etc.

you promised to publish proper roadmap in March, where is it? no need to play the game, “guys choose what you want us to do so we blame you for the wrong choice later”.

this is YOUR project and YOU are responsible for its success!!!

[han]

Absolutely agree the roadmap has to be refined.

I said the above is If the goal is to extend the runway, I think it would be more difficult to add to the plate right now. If Brainbot could do more with less, that would be great but I felt that is unrealistic ( I more than happy to be correct )

We have a very contentious proposal and a close voting result at this time. 1% difference with each around 50% so my thought is we firstly achieve what most of people agreed: extending runway

I agree that a refined strategy is better. We need to define priorities, but that felt like the next step. I would say we also need to collect the learning and data ( perhaps based on an audit/review like one Ricky proposed)

[han]

If the DAO need to vote on future roadmap. (After brainbot propose its proposal on its new stream)

Two things would be good to share from the BB end.

1 ) How could each priority extend the runway, and accurate value.

2 ) What has been past obstacles that meaningful usage, adaptation of Shutter Network.

After 2 or even more years of time has been spent on drive adoption. I believe Brainbot [1] can share some insight and reflection on adoption challenges. These are valuable lesson [2] and set expectation for DAO members. BTW This is also the goal Proposal 60.

[1] To certain extend, any other parties who did some kind of BD can share their learning as well

[2] For future roadmap( priorities implies here), if we go for the same router, namely: working on a tech issue without PMF anticipation, adoption assessment, how does it extend the runway. That would be like step into the same river once again, when we already know it is all ice cold there