Se7en Labs: Daedalus Wallet Maintenance and Improvements 2026-2027
Discussed in the Governance Review for epochs 647 to 649.
180 DReps voted · 64 with a rationale · 1 changed their vote · 1 re-voted unchanged
Open a row to read the rationale.
Changed votes: 1 to yes, together voting with 50.4M ₳ of voting power.
Voting concentration
8 of 180 DReps cast half of the voted power.
Largest voter 12.5%, top 5 combined 40.1% of 4.6B ₳ voted.
The 8 largest voters together held as much voting power as the 67.0% threshold required in yes votes.
- Yes10.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes10.3M ₳Rationale
Although the business model is not very successful and there aren't many users, alternative wallets that are open source are needed
- Yes9.5M ₳Rationale
Consistent with my 2026 Intersect budget process votes, I am voting YES. This is part of the bulk proposals submitted by Intersect from that process.
Hydra Evidence IPFS: https://bafybeie6yykngvn5xsq6va6nwz3sdeadgxd45yhsoeqpuiyxh4tky5tuzi.ipfs.inbrowser.link/
X-Post: https://x.com/mr_cata/status/2063660464450527709?s=20 - Yes8.9M ₳Rationale
RCADA votes YES on Se7en Labs: Daedalus Wallet Maintenance and Improvements 2026–2027.
RCADA supports this proposal because Daedalus remains a unique and important part of the Cardano wallet ecosystem. It is Cardano’s full-node desktop wallet, giving users a way to verify chain data directly without relying on third-party APIs or trusted wallet backends. That self-sovereign model is valuable for users who prioritise independent verification, local key control, and open-source auditability.
Daedalus may not be the most lightweight or convenient wallet for every user, but that is not its purpose. Its value is that it preserves a different trust model. In a healthy wallet ecosystem, users should have a choice between convenience-focused lite wallets and a maintained full-node wallet option. If Daedalus falls behind on protocol compatibility, operating-system support, security updates, or hard-fork readiness, Cardano loses an important self-custody and decentralisation pathway.
RCADA also views this as a strong public-good proposal. Daedalus is free and open source under the Apache 2.0 license, and the proposal states that Se7en Labs does not monetize Daedalus usage through subscriptions, customer relationships, token value, or IP exclusivity. The funded outputs remain public, auditable, and forkable by the community. That makes this materially different from funding a private commercial product expansion.
The scope of work is practical and relevant. It includes node and wallet backend updates, hard-fork readiness, Leios and Peras readiness, security and dependency maintenance, reproducible Nix build infrastructure, binary signing continuity, platform support across Windows, macOS, and Linux, Japanese localisation, user support, Keystone and Flex hardware-wallet support, a CIP-30 dApp connector, and a public architecture assessment.
RCADA especially values the proposed CIP-30 work. Daedalus users are currently limited in their ability to interact with the dApp ecosystem without switching to another wallet. Allowing full-node users to access dApps while preserving the Daedalus trust model would be a meaningful improvement, provided it is implemented without introducing trusted external API dependencies or weakening user security.
The team’s delivery history also supports confidence. Se7en Labs has been operating under an IOG contract for Daedalus maintenance and reports delivery of important improvements including Mithril snapshot bootstrap, UTxO-HD / LSM backend integration, Apple Silicon support, release tooling improvements, and Nix build modernisation. This suggests the team understands the complexity of maintaining Daedalus across protocol, platform, build, and release layers.
The requested amount of 1,785,333 ADA is reasonable for a year of full-node wallet maintenance and improvement, especially given the complexity of Daedalus and the need to remain aligned with Cardano node, wallet, and protocol changes. The proposal also includes Intersect administration, monthly disbursement against verified work, financial audit funding, public GitHub-verifiable release metrics, and the return of unspent budget items where applicable.
RCADA’s support comes with expectations. The Daedalus user base is smaller than mainstream lite-wallet usage, so value-for-money must be demonstrated clearly. RCADA expects timely hard-fork compatible releases, visible repository activity, signed release artifacts, security and dependency updates, continued platform support, Japanese-language support, hardware-wallet delivery, CIP-30 delivery without external API dependency, responsive user support, and publication of the architecture assessment regardless of outcome.
On balance, RCADA believes this proposal meets the standard for support. It funds open-source, self-sovereign wallet infrastructure, protects Cardano’s full-node user pathway, supports decentralisation and protocol resilience, and improves Daedalus for users who continue to rely on it.
RCADA's full vote assessment can be found here:
https://brolloks.github.io/rcada-drep-votes/ - Yes8.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes7.6M ₳Rationale
Daedalus is not the leading Cardano wallet today. It spent years on the backburner, so it fell behind on speed, features, and user experience.
A faster Daedalus, improved in stages, could win back a meaningful share of users. The SecondFi wallet fumble reminded people why wallet architecture matters. Convenience is not enough if it adds hidden trust assumptions. Users need options that reduce dependence on companies, servers, and third-party backends. The fewer trust points Cardano requires, the stronger its global adoption case becomes.
Daedalus is a flagbearer for Cardano’s original values. It tells ADA holders that self-custody should mean more than holding a seed phrase inside someone else’s interface. A normal user should be able to connect directly to Cardano, validate the chain, and avoid middlemen where possible.
That is the point of an efficient financial operating system. It should reduce middlemen. It should help people take personal responsibility while lowering their risk.
Daedalus is collective insurance for individual users. Today, that may mean thousands of users. If Daedalus becomes faster, easier, and more capable, it could serve far more. The proposed upgrades [hard-fork readiness, more hardware wallet support, CIP-30 (to unlock DeFi and dApp access for full-node users), Japanese localisation, and continued full-node support] give Daedalus a real chance to regain relevance.
Daedalus downloads and validates the Cardano blockchain itself. It gives users a direct relationship with the chain. In an era of speculation, short attention spans, and convenience-first products, Cardano risks losing a key building block of its financial OS.
Daedalus is Cardano’s home terminal. It lets users verify and interact with the chain without asking permission from a middleman. That is secure home banking and it's worth preserving. Daedalus may not be the most popular wallet today, but it represents the kind of financial independence Cardano should still fight for. - Yes7.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes6.3M ₳No rationale
- No5.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.7M ₳Rationale
I consider this important work to be done.
- Yes5.5M ₳Rationale
We absolutely need ongoing maintenance for Cardano’s only full node, and the team behind it has an excellent track record.
- Yes5.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.2M ₳Rationale
We recommend voting YES to this proposal as it is one of the clearest and most logical cases for public infrastructure funding.
First, Daedalus is Cardano's only full-node wallet, playing a vital role in the network's decentralization; each installation is a full node. If Daedalus falls behind in protocol compatibility, a group of users who value self-sovereignty will have no alternative.
Second, it is a transparent time-and-materials model, not a risky fixed-price one, with budgets tied to verified actual work, unused funds returned to the Treasury, and an independent financial audit.
Third, the Se7en Labs team has a concrete and verifiable track record: since January 2026, they have shipped Daedalus 8.0 and 11.0, integrated Mithril, supported Apple Silicon, and modernized their build system, with all builds publicly available on GitHub, eliminating the need for self-reporting.
Fourth, this is pure Apache 2.0 open-source software; no private business model benefits exclusively, and the asset permanently belongs to the community, truly embodying the "public good" that the Treasury should fund.
Finally, the cost (~1.78M ADA/year) is reasonable considering the scale of ongoing maintenance work across upcoming hard forks (Leios, Peras).
- Yes5.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes5.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes4.2M ₳Rationale
[Portuguese]
Optamos por votar "SIM" nesta ação de governança "Se7en Labs: Daedalus Wallet Maintenance and Improvements 2026-2027" (gov_action1mr0...4yjd6j), pois entendemos que a proposta assegura a continuidade e a evolução da Daedalus, a única carteira desktop full node da Cardano. Sua manutenção é essencial para preservar a segurança, a soberania dos usuários sobre seus ativos e a compatibilidade com futuras atualizações do protocolo, além de ampliar a integração com aplicações descentralizadas e novos dispositivos de hardware. O valor solicitado, de ₳1.785.333, nos parece compatível com o escopo das atividades previstas, incluindo manutenção contínua, suporte multiplataforma e implementação de novas funcionalidades. Avaliamos que a proposta apresenta uma relação custo-benefício adequada diante da importância estratégica da Daedalus para o ecossistema Cardano e para os usuários que optam por uma experiência totalmente descentralizada. Também consideramos positivos os mecanismos de governança, controle e transparência previstos na proposta, como desembolsos mensais condicionados à verificação das entregas, auditoria financeira, supervisão independente da Intersect, utilização de contratos inteligentes para gestão dos pagamentos e acompanhamento público da execução por meio de registros on-chain. Esses mecanismos reforçam a responsabilidade na utilização dos recursos da Tesouraria e permitem que a comunidade acompanhe a evolução do projeto de forma transparente.
[English]
We chose to vote "YES" on this governance action "Se7en Labs: Daedalus Wallet Maintenance and Improvements 2026-2027" (gov_action1mr0...4yjd6j), because we believe the proposal ensures the continued maintenance and evolution of Daedalus, Cardano’s only desktop full-node wallet. Maintaining this software is essential to preserving user security, self-custody, and compatibility with future protocol upgrades, while also expanding support for decentralized applications and new hardware wallet integrations. The requested ₳1,785,333 appears proportionate to the proposed scope of work, which includes ongoing maintenance, cross-platform support, and the delivery of new features. In our view, the proposal offers good value considering Daedalus’ strategic importance to the Cardano ecosystem and to users who prefer a fully decentralized wallet experience. We also view the proposal’s governance, oversight, and transparency mechanisms positively. These include monthly disbursements tied to verified work, financial audits, independent oversight by Intersect, smart contract-based payment management, and public on-chain monitoring of project execution. Together, these measures strengthen accountability and provide the community with clear visibility into how Treasury resources are being used. - Yes4.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes4M ₳Rationale
I believe that cryptocurrency is self-sovereign monetary control and the existence of Daedalus ensures that at the ultimate extreme of our values there is at least one option to be the most pure version of a interaction on the blockchain as possible.
While I am not a user, and Daedalus has caused me days and days of frustration over the years, especially back when it was the only wallet, but this is a values based vote that we need to maintain the core of what a blockchain is supposed to be as an option on Cardano.
- Yes4M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes3.1M ₳No rationale
- Yes3M ₳Rationale
More than happy to vote YES on this proposal. Having a full node wallet is essential for the continued operation and security of the Cardano blockchain. The latest exploit and wallet fund theft with the SecondFi / Yoroi / Emurgo wallet proves exactly why ADA holders having access to their own full node wallet is essential.
The continued operation, maintenance, and improvement of Daedalus brought to us by a trusted team is something that truly is essential for our blockchain.
- Yes2.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.7M ₳Rationale
I am voting YES for this. Although I would like to see a better breakdown of funding, this is an initiative that clearly needs funding given recent events, and the ask is well within moderation. I remember running mine for the first time, I would love to see people go back to running their own Deadalus Wallets. I trust the team behind this proposal to get work done.
- Yes2.7M ₳Rationale
私は本Treasury Withdrawalに賛成します。
Daedalusは、Cardanoにおける重要なfull-node desktop walletであり、第三者APIやtrusted backendに依存せず、ユーザー自身がCardano chainを検証できる自己主権型のアクセス層です。SPO分散性を直接高めるものではありませんが、wallet backendやAPI providerへの依存を下げ、Cardanoのaccess decentralization、resilience、client/access diversityを支える公共インフラとして評価できます。
本提案は、今後のhard fork、Leios、Peras、Nested Transactionsへの追従、Keystone/Flex対応、CIP-30 dApp connector、日本語ローカライズ、ユーザーサポートを含み、Cardanoの長期的な安全性と利用継続性に資するものです。
また、Intersect管理、smart contract disbursement、monthly disbursement、oversight、dashboard、未使用資金返還の設計も、Treasury資金管理として評価できます。
一方で、Daedalusのopt-in MAUは限定的であり、1,785,333 ADAの費用対効果については継続的な説明が必要です。今後は、hard fork前release、CIP-30 interoperability、support実績、日本語対応、利用KPI、未使用分返還の公開を求めます。
総合的には、Daedalusを大衆向けlight walletに変える提案ではなく、Cardanoに自己検証可能なfull-node walletの入口を残す公共財保守として支持します。
I support this Treasury Withdrawal.
Daedalus is an important full-node desktop wallet in the Cardano ecosystem. It provides a self-sovereign access layer where users can verify the Cardano chain themselves, without relying on third-party APIs or trusted backends. While Daedalus does not directly increase SPO decentralization, it reduces dependence on wallet backends and API providers, supporting Cardano’s access decentralization, resilience, and client/access diversity.
This proposal includes support for future hard forks, Leios, Peras, Nested Transactions, Keystone/Flex hardware wallets, a CIP-30 dApp connector, Japanese localization, and user support. These are important for Cardano’s long-term security, compatibility, and continuity of use.
I also value the treasury management design, including Intersect administration, smart contract disbursement, monthly disbursements, oversight, dashboard transparency, and return of unused funds.
At the same time, Daedalus has limited opt-in MAU, so the cost-effectiveness of spending 1,785,333 ADA should continue to be clearly explained. Going forward, I expect public reporting on pre-hard-fork releases, CIP-30 interoperability, support activity, Japanese localization, usage KPIs, and any unused funds returned to the Treasury.
Overall, I support this proposal as public-good maintenance that preserves an important self-verifying full-node wallet access point for Cardano, rather than as an attempt to turn Daedalus into a mass-market light wallet.
- Abstain2.5M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.5M ₳Rationale
DUH! we need this.
- Yes2.4M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.2M ₳No rationale
- Yes2.1M ₳Rationale
I am voting YES on the Daedalus Wallet Maintenance and Improvements 2026–2027 proposal.
Daedalus remains a unique and important part of the Cardano ecosystem. It is Cardano’s only full-node desktop wallet, allowing users to verify the chain directly rather than relying on third-party APIs or trusted backend services. That makes Daedalus materially different from light wallets and important for self-sovereignty, client diversity, decentralisation, and resilient access to Cardano.
This proposal is a focused maintenance and improvement request, not a speculative growth proposal. It funds ongoing protocol compatibility, hard fork readiness, node and wallet backend updates, dependency and security maintenance, platform support, release engineering, user support, Japanese localisation, hardware wallet support, and future-facing improvements such as CIP-30 dApp connector support.
In the current NCL environment, I believe DReps need to be selective and prioritise core infrastructure. My approach is to support proposals that maintain essential public goods, security-critical systems, developer/user access, self-custody, and decentralised infrastructure before larger or more speculative treasury requests.
Daedalus clearly fits that category.
I also note positively that the proposal includes a defined scope of work, measurable success criteria, independent financial audit funding, Intersect administration, milestone-based oversight, and return of unspent funds. These are important safeguards for a treasury withdrawal.
The ask is material, but I consider it proportionate given the importance of maintaining Cardano’s only full-node desktop wallet through upcoming protocol changes and ecosystem upgrades.
For these reasons, I believe this is a responsible use of treasury funds.
I vote YES.
- Yes1.9M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.8M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.6M ₳Rationale
Daedalus offers a Cardano wallet that is unique in the ecosystem, for users who want maximum security at every layer. This proposal funds ongoing maintenance and new features, including additional hardware wallet support and a direct dapp connector.
- Yes1.6M ₳No rationale
- No1.3M ₳No rationale
- Yes1.3M ₳Rationale
It's easy to lose focus of the core blockchain principles in today's climate with socials full of distractions, but having a self-hosted node is a necessity. Will the majority of users use a self-hosted node? No, of course not. But as with any industry, the "power users" are the ones that drive it forward while the majority of users follow their path. Shutting down maintenance of a self-hosted node would isolate power users and likely remove them from the ecosystem, which is a huge net negative.
- Yes1.3M ₳No rationale