GravityBridge IBC reactivation

Change log • 2026-07-18 Created initial post • 2026-08-25 Update tendermint client Summary Through accepting this proposal it is proposed to unfreeze the expired IBC Tendermint client `07-tendermint-582` which interconnects the Cosmos SDK blockchains cosmoshub-4 and gravity-bridge-3 Details Due to an exploit executed on Gravity Bridge, the network was down for several weeks, causing IBC clients to expire. Here are the details of the expired client and the new one, which is kept active and updated daily. chain_id: `comoshub-4` subject_client_id: `07-tendermint-582`[ state ] [ status ] substitute_client_id: `07-tendermint-1508` [ state ] [ status ] ``` "trusting_period": "1451520s", "unbonding_period": "1814400s", "max_clock_drift": "20s", ``` Governance votes The following items summarize the voting options and what it means for this proposal: YES - The canonical Tendermint client 07-tendermint-582, which interconnects and gravity-bridge-3 and cosmoshub-4 will get updated with the state of another active Tendermint client (07-tendermint-1508). NO - The Tendermint client 07-tendermint-582 remains expired/frozen. NO WITH VETO - A…

Excerpt (1188 of 1705 characters). Read the whole post on the forum ↗

Please @lexa , since the proposal (1048) didn’t reach the quorum, could you include the message in the next software upgrade?

{
 "messages": [
  {/*SofwareUpgrade msg*/},
  {
    "@type": "/ibc.core.client.v1.MsgRecoverClient",
    "subject_client_id": "07-tendermint-582",
    "substitute_client_id": "07-tendermint-1508",
    "signer": "cosmos10d07y265gmmuvt4z0w9aw880jnsr700j6zn9kn"
  }
 ]
}

We ain’t reactivating any client that ain’t accepted bruh xD

We typically don’t roll client recoveries into upgrades, particularly on short notice since our upgrades use the same commit as the release candidate that has gone through the testnet process. Additionally…we really can’t be implementing things that have entered governance but haven’t passed. Governance is the way for validators and tokenholders to express their opinions on what the Hub should be doing, and the dev team typically doesn’t over-rule that.

I would recommend repeating the proposal and doing validator outreach.

I agree. I notified the main validators, but most of them don’t seem to be active. I’ll try again when you submit the SoftwareUpgrade proposal, and hopefully they’ll take the time to vote on my proposal as well.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.