{"@context":{"CIP100":"https://github.com/cardano-foundation/CIPs/blob/master/CIP-0100/README.md#","hashAlgorithm":"CIP100:hashAlgorithm","body":{"@id":"CIP100:body","@context":{"comment":"CIP100:comment"}}},"hashAlgorithm":"blake2b-256","body":{"comment":"Primary rationale\nOpenZeppelin's security record is not the issue, and Intersect has set this up properly: milestone payments it verifies, an independent oversight committee, automatic sweep-back of unused funds.\n\nI am voting No mainly because the treasury has already funded part of this work and the proposal does not say so. In May 2026 DReps approved Input Output's Developer Experience Initiative, which includes an OpenZeppelin-style contracts library now in development. This proposal says Cardano has no standardised, audited contract library and mentions neither that work nor the other libraries in the ecosystem. An 11.79M ada request should start from what exists and explain what it adds.\n\nI also cannot rebuild the cost. Delivery is five equal payments of 2,288,750 ada with no roles, headcount or day rates. The contract language, which drives staffing, audit method and maintenance, is picked after funding, and 20% goes out at signature before anything is delivered.\n\nS&P Global's agreement to buy OpenZeppelin came after the proposal was written, and there is no disclosure or change-of-control provision. Nothing improper in that, but the counterparty has materially changed.\n\nA Yes would fund a second library before the first is delivered and compared, on a budget I could not check. My No has a cost too: the work does not start on this timeline, and OpenZeppelin may not come back."}}