Project & Team
Description of Project
Provide a concise narrative that clearly states each of (a)–(e) below.
- (a) Problem the project solves — The problem the project is solving.
- (b) Operational priorities — Provide a high-level description of how the project expects to support ongoing development and operations over time.
- (c) High-level project overview — How the project works at a high level.
- (d) Primary token functions — The primary functions of the token (e.g. gov participation).
- (e) Control surface reliance — If any, briefly describe the anticipated or possible evolution of the protocol's governance/control model.
(a) Problem the project solves
Mina is presented as a public, decentralized layer-1 blockchain built to keep the chain extremely small while supporting zero-knowledge applications.sourcesource The public materials describe Mina as the "world's lightest blockchain" with a blockchain of about 22KB and zkApps written in TypeScript. One key difference between this and many other layer-1s is that execution occurs off-chain, and the only thing recorded on-chain is the proof verification and settlement.
(b) Operational priorities
Public sources frame Mina's ongoing priorities around network health, security, grants, developer growth, and continued protocol contributions. Mina Foundation publicly states that it supports the protocol through grants, community assets, and ecosystem growth, while o1Labs states that it continues to develop Mina as incubator and developer of the protocol.
(c) High-level project overview
The public documentation describes Mina as a proof-of-stake blockchain where participants can join as nodes or block producers, and where SNARK workers produce zk-snark proofs of the chain state. The economics whitepaper explains that holders may also delegate stake to block producers rather than staking directly. Token holders can find resources about how to stake or delegate on the Mina Protocol website.
(d) Primary token functions
MINA is the native currency of the Mina blockchain and is required for block production and for purchasing SNARK proofs via the Snarketplace. Public materials also describe MINA as the asset used for staking or delegation in proof-of-stake consensus and for participation in protocol governance.
(e) Control surface reliance
Mina uses an on-chain governance mechanism for protocol upgrades and governance decisions. o1Labs operates a delegation program that delegates a portion of its MINA holdings to community validators according to a publicly documented delegation policy. source Validators retain control over voting with their own stake and delegated stake, while o1Labs actively participates in governance with the voting rights associated with the portion of tokens it continues to control. The protocol's governance model is intended to support broad community participation through on-chain governance, and there is no centralized protocol administrator or protocol-wide pause authority.
Known Project Team
For each existing entity: Labs/DevCo (e.g., Founder, CEO, CTO, COO), Foundation (e.g., President, Executive Director, CFO, COO), and DAO / onchain governance leadership (if applicable) list the: (a) full names, (b) official titles, (c) and prior experience of key team members. For any non-existent entity, explicitly mention it does not exist. External links may be included but they will not factor into the score.
Labs / DevCo
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
Deepthi Kumar | Co-CEO of o1Labs | Early protocol engineer at o1Labs (joined 2018), later Engineering Manager, before becoming Co-CEO |
Nicole Farrar | Co-CEO of o1Labs | Nicole has a background as product and regulatory counsel to fintech and crypto companies such as LendingClub, Coinbase, and Anchorage Digital. Previous, Nicole was o1Labs' General Counsel, where she oversaw the company's legal function and interfaced with engineers and operations personnel alike, before becoming Co-CEO |
Foundation
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
Josh Cincinnati | Interim CEO of Mina Foundation | Former Executive Director of the Zcash Foundation; serves as President of the Interchain Foundation Council and has governance and advisory experience across multiple Web3 organizations. |
Mollie Fehlig | COO/CFO of Mina Foundation | Previously served as Vice President of Finance & Business Operations at Mina Foundation; prior experience includes finance and operations leadership at Flori Ventures, Funding Circle, BNP Paribas, and Deutsche Bank. |
DAO / Onchain Governance
Full Name | Official Title | Prior Experience |
|---|---|---|
N/A - No DAO | N/A - No DAO | N/A - No DAO |
DAO Structure
Provide a structured description of the DAO's governance, powers, and economic rights. If a DAO does not exist, state so. Address the lettered items below. Even if there is no DAO, there must be an answer to (d).
- (a) IP ownership & control — State what IP the DAO owns or controls (e.g., codebases/repos, trademarks/brands). Note any license if relevant.
- (b) Contract/admin powers — List on-chain or administrative authorities and limits: pause/upgrade roles (e.g., multisig pause), governance-executor authorities, and the method of authority for each (e.g., veto, majority, super-majority).
- (c) Locked-token rights (conditional) — If locking/staking for additional rights exists, explain the additional rights and what tokenholders can and cannot decide. If no locking mechanism exists, leave absent.
- (d) Value accrual & holder rights — If any, describe the current rights of tokenholders over revenue distribution and the treasury.
- (e) Dissolution authority — State who can dissolve/wind up the DAO and by what mechanism (e.g., on-chain vote threshold, board resolution of a legal wrapper).
(a) IP ownership & control
All Mina Protocol and SDK software is written and published as open source code, either under the Apache 2.0 or MIT license.
(b) Contract/admin powers
The public governance surface described in the cited sources includes a formal MIP process for proposing, reviewing, and finalizing protocol changes, plus an on-chain voting mechanism in which voting weight is tied to staked MINA and delegated stake, voting snapshots are taken two epochs before the voting epoch, and votes are cast through self-send memo transactions that are recorded on-chain and surfaced in the voting dashboard. Mina Foundation also publicly said it would delegate its Foundation Voting Amount to community validators rather than use that voting power directly while that delegation policy remained in effect. o1Labs originally also publicly committed to delegate its voting amount to community validators but once the company held less than 10% of the voting stake, the company announced that going forward, it would exercise its voting rights as a participant in the Mina ecosystem. Source The cited public sources still do not disclose a public DAO executor, pause authority, upgrade multisig, or similar DAO-admin control surface.
(c) Locked-token rights (conditional)
While no longer applicable, locked tokens were publicly described as stakeable or delegable even while they remained non-transferable. Genesis Program materials also stated that unvested Genesis allocations must continue to be staked or delegated during vesting or the holder risked forfeiture of unvested tokens. Genesis tokens had a four-year vesting schedule. The Mina Protocol mainnet occurred in March 2021 and has been live for over 5 years; accordingly, locked-token rights are no longer applicable as all tokens are unlocked.
(d) Value accrual & holder rights
No public data found in cited sources. Mina does not generate or distribute protocol revenue, profits, dividends, or other cash flows to tokenholders. The decentralization of the Mina Foundation treasury is an active area of development, with plans to launch by the end of 2026. Any future treasury governance rights, funding allocation processes, or tokenholder authorities will be communicated by the Mina Foundation and could be subject to community approval and implementation through the network's governance process.
(e) Dissolution authority
N/A - No DAO
Primary Foundation
For the Primary Foundation do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
- (a) Entity — Type and jurisdiction.
- (b) IP ownership & control — What IP the entity owns/controls (repos/code, trademarks/brand; license optional) and an explanation of any subsidiary entities.
- (c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration — If any, describe the current powers over DAO governance, treasury actions, protocol-controlled resources (e.g. revenue), token administration, or reward parameters, and the method/threshold for each.
- (d) Powers over DevCo — Explain whether the foundation can exert direct or indirect influence over decision-making of the DevCo.
- (e) Contract/admin powers — Pause/upgrade/governance-executor authorities and the method/threshold for each (e.g., veto/majority/super-majority; "3/5 multisig").
- (f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies — Describe any current governance-approved, contractual, or programmatic mechanisms, if any, by which protocol-controlled resources, treasury assets, fees, revenue, rewards, or token distributions may be directed to this entity, its equityholders, contributors, or other participants. If no such mechanism currently exists, state that explicitly. Do not discuss hypothetical future dividends, repurchases, or distributions unless formally adopted.
(a) Entity
The cited public record identifies Mina Foundation as the foundation-like stewarding entity for the protocol. Mina Foundation is publicly described as a public benefit foundation established in Switzerland, with a registered office at Rue du Commerce 4, 1204 Geneva, Switzerland.
(b) IP ownership & control
Public sources show a limited slice of publicly disclosed control and economic structure. The minaprotocol.com site is publicly described as a copyrighted work belonging to Mina Foundation, and the site terms state that the site's intellectual property rights are owned by Mina Foundation or its suppliers. Mina Foundation also publicly states that it will follow its delegation policy until such time as it controls less than 10% of the total vote outstanding. The Mina Foundation delegates its voting power to community validators under its delegation policy rather than exercising it directly.
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration
Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration
Mina Foundation currently controls and administers its own treasury assets, including MINA categorized as Treasury holdings and Grants holdings. Treasury assets are used primarily to support Mina Foundation's administration and operations, while Grants assets are used primarily to support the Mina ecosystem and Mina Protocol community. MINA controlled by Mina Foundation has historically been held through its wholly owned subsidiary, Mina Foundation Ltd.
Mina Foundation is currently developing a decentralized, on-chain community treasury to transition a substantial portion of its MINA holdings from Foundation control to community-directed governance. The Foundation has publicly stated a working target of approximately 55 million MINA for deployment to this decentralized treasury, subject to legal, regulatory and other considerations. The treasury is being implemented as a zkApp/smart contract and is intended to allow MINA holders to vote on funding proposals, with funds released following the applicable governance and approval process. The Foundation has stated that funds will be deployed to the decentralized treasury progressively as confidence in the implementation increases.
During the initial phase, the proposed decentralized treasury design includes a break-glass multisig with a supermajority veto for malicious or system-threatening proposals, with this control intended to be reduced or sunset as the treasury governance system matures. This authority relates to administration and security of the decentralized treasury and does not provide Mina Foundation with unilateral authority over the Mina Protocol itself.
Mina Foundation does not control protocol revenue and does not have unilateral authority to change Mina Protocol-level reward parameters.
(d) Powers over DevCo
More recent Foundation disclosures state that Mina Foundation's prior responsibilities have transferred to the DevCo, o1Labs, that the scaled-down Foundation is concentrating on the Decentralized Treasury, that the current working target for that treasury is 55 million MINA (approximately 4.25% of circulating supply, based on CoinMarketCap’s estimate of total circulating supply at the time of this publication), and that the Foundation has paused its delegation program pending deployment of programmatic delegations because of custodian-related changes. A subsequent quarterly report lists quarter-end balances as of March 31, 2026 of 24,330,000 MINA in Treasury holdings and 52,210,000 MINA in Grants holdings, and states that fiat-to-MINA purchases use third-party non-U.S. professional service providers and systematic strategies capped at 2% of daily trading volume.
(e) Contract/admin powers
Contract/admin powers
Mina Foundation does not hold a protocol-wide pause authority, unilateral protocol upgrade authority, governance executor, or other administrative key that permits it to modify Mina Protocol independently of the network's governance and upgrade processes. Protocol changes are proposed and coordinated through the Mina Improvement Proposal and governance processes and ultimately require adoption by the network.
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies
Public sources do show that Mina Foundation had a foundation endowment within the initial distribution and that the delegation program returns staking rewards to delegators while allowing delegated validators to keep 8% of staking rewards. No broader public data was found in cited sources for current governance-approved distribution policies beyond those publicly disclosed arrangements.
Primary Dev Co
For the Primary DevCo do the following independently. If an entity does not exist, state that explicitly. Items (a)–(f) apply only if that entity exists; state explicitly that the entity doesn't exist. Definitions: The primary Foundation and DevCo can be explained as those entities which are directly involved in the issuance of the native token at launch.
- (a) Entity — Type and jurisdiction.
- (b) IP ownership & control — What IP the entity owns/controls (repos/code, trademarks/brand; license optional) and an explanation of any subsidiary entities.
- (c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration — If any, describe the current powers over DAO governance, treasury actions, protocol-controlled resources (e.g. revenue), token administration, or reward parameters, and the method/threshold for each.
- (d) Powers over Foundation — Explain whether the DevCo can exert direct or indirect influence over decision-making of the Foundation.
- (e) Contract/admin powers — Pause/upgrade/governance-executor authorities and the method/threshold for each (e.g., veto/majority/super-majority; "3/5 multisig").
- (f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies — Describe any current governance-approved, contractual, or programmatic mechanisms, if any, by which protocol-controlled resources, treasury assets, fees, revenue, rewards, or token distributions may be directed to this entity, its equityholders, contributors, or other participants. If no such mechanism currently exists, state that explicitly. Do not discuss hypothetical future dividends, repurchases, or distributions unless formally adopted.
(a) Entity
The cited public record identifies o1Labs as the DevCo-like entity for Mina. o1Labs is publicly described as the incubator and primary developer of Mina Protocol, and the Mina token-distribution post describes it as a San Francisco-based startup that incubated Mina and continues to contribute via code contributions and operational support. The current o1Labs about page also describes the company as global and remote. A later ecosystem-transition announcement states that ownership of core operational functions has transferred to o1Labs, including engineering and development, marketing and communications, community growth and engagement, tools and infrastructure, the grants program, and the delegation program. o1Labs (officially “O(1) Labs Operating Corporation) is a U.S.-based corporation formed in Delaware, and its registration can be found on the Delaware Secretary of State website (file number 6757123. Source). No other public data was found in cited sources for the DevCo's IP ownership boundaries relative to Mina Foundation, powers over the Foundation, public pause or upgrade authorities, or current economic arrangements and distribution policies beyond the public statements that o1Labs incubated Mina, continues to develop it, and now operates the transferred core functions described in the transition announcement.
(b) IP ownership & control
All Mina Protocol and SDK software is written and published as open source code, either under the Apache 2.0 or MIT license.
(c) Powers over DAO, treasury, protocol-controlled resources, and token administration
Mina Protocol does not have a DAO. o1Labs does not possess unilateral voting, veto, or execution authority over an on-chain DAO or protocol treasury.
(d) Powers over Foundation
o1Labs and Mina Foundation are legally separate entities with separate governing bodies. o1Labs does not have the formal power to appoint or remove Mina Foundation directors, bind Mina Foundation, veto its board decisions, or unilaterally direct its treasury or operations, except to the extent of any express rights contained in a binding agreement between the entities.
(e) Contract/admin powers
With Mina Protocol, o1Labs does not hold a unilateral protocol administrator key, governance-executor key, or emergency key capable of pausing the Mina blockchain, reversing transactions, freezing third-party accounts, confiscating tokens, or deploying a mandatory protocol upgrade.
Mina Protocol upgrades are implemented through new node software and, where necessary, a coordinated network upgrade or hard fork. o1Labs can develop and publish the relevant software, and coordinate testing and deployment. A proposed upgrade nevertheless becomes effective only through adoption and operation of compatible software by network participants. o1Labs does not possess a cryptographic key that independently forces all network participants to upgrade.
(f) Current economic arrangements and distribution policies
N/A - no such mechanisms exist. Mina is a fully decentralized protocol. Protocol-controlled resources (e.g. treasury) can't be handed to any single entity without community consensus
Token Supply & Allocations
Initial Allocation
Ticker | Date | Allocation Category Name | Recipient Type | Allocation % | Allocation Tokens | TGE Unlock % | TGE Unlock Tokens | Cliff Months | Cliff Unlock % | Linear Vesting Months | Cadence Months | Circulating Treatment | Notes on what each category is used for | If applicable: Contract / Wallet address |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
MINA | 3/23/21 | Pre-Mainnet Genesis Members | Community | 0.044 | 44000000 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 36 | 1 | No | 66,000 MINA grants to (663) Genesis Members; 4-year vesting with a 1-year cliff; required to be staked. | holding |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Community Sale | Public / Sale | 0.075 | 75000000 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | Yes | CoinList community sale; modeled as fully unlocking roughly 40 days after the April 2021 sale (May 2021). | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Project Grants | Community | 0.11 | 110000000 | 1 | 110000000 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 1 | Conditional | Mina Foundation-controlled grants for protocol, zkApp, operational and community contributions; unlock over 4 years. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Supercharged Rewards | Ecosystem | 0.0462 | 46200000 | 1 | 46200000 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 1 | No | Projected extra staking rewards, minted after genesis; modeled over the first 15 months. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Post-Mainnet Genesis Members | Community | 0.088 | 88000000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | No | Projected program that did not launch; To the reasonable knowledge of o1Labs current team members, the project program did not launch. However, the supercharged rewards inflation mechanism ran for three years (until Berkeley mainnet) compared to the forecasted [amount of time they were supposed to run], resulting in all token holders other than o1Labs receiving a higher than anticipated allocation from inflation. o1Labs did not receive any super charged rewards, only the regular rewards. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | SNARK Mining | Ecosystem | 0.06 | 60000000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | No | Same as above. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Mina Foundation Endowment | Insiders | 0.06 | 60000000 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 42 | 1 | No | 20% unlocked at launch; remaining 80% unlocked continuously over 3.5 years beginning 6 months after mainnet. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | o1Labs Endowment | Insiders | 0.075 | 75000000 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 1 | No | Endowment supporting continued Mina development and talent; unlocks over 4 years from mainnet launch. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Backers | Private / VC | 0.2054 | 205400000 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 18 | 1 | No | Aggregate of pre-mainnet backer rounds. Officially unlocked over 18 months, with first tranche only after 40 days after Community Sale tokens began unlocking. | |
MINA | 3/23/21 | Core Contributors | Insiders | 0.2364 | 236400000 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 36 | 1 | No | Core contributor grants vest over 4 years with a 1-year cliff; individual schedules vary by employment start date. |
Airdrop Process
Address each of the following sub-items based on the project's airdrop status. If a sub-item does not apply to the project's situation, state that explicitly.
- (a) Planned but not yet executed airdrop — If the project has planned but not yet airdropped, commit to publishing a recipient wallet list in a public channel and provide it to Blockworks quarterly until the initial TGE airdrop is fully completed. Additionally, generally state the possible target user segments (e.g., "stakers of X," "Aave users") and the allocation method (e.g., proportional to ve-balance or net position).
- (b) Executed airdrop — If the project has already airdropped, point to a per-address source such as CSV/TSV/JSON files, a Dune table, a full Merkle dump, GitHub repo files embedding per-address allocations, or RPC endpoints that expose claim/amount data; explorer links alone do not count. Additionally, clearly state covered user segments (e.g., "stakers of X," "Aave users") and the allocation method (e.g., proportional to ve-balance or net position).
- (c) No airdrop planned or conducted — If the project does not plan to conduct an airdrop for TGE and has never conducted one, state so plainly (e.g., "We have never conducted an airdrop to date and do not plan to execute one").
(a) Planned but not yet executed airdrop
There are no planned airdrops
(b) Executed airdrop
There have been no previously executed airdrops
(c) No airdrop planned or conducted
The cited public record does not show a conventional retroactive user airdrop with a public per-address allocation file. The closest publicly disclosed launch-era distributions matching this section was the Genesis Program grant surface: up to 1,000 testnet-community participants were eligible to become Genesis founding members, qualifying members were to receive equal 66,000 MINA grants, and those grants were tied to ongoing block-producer participation through staking or delegation with a four-year vesting schedule, which has already concluded. The public target segment was therefore highly engaged testnet participants and future block producers, and the public allocation method was equal-sized Genesis grants rather than a proportional wallet snapshot.source. In addition to the Genesis Program, Mina Foundation also conducted a community token sale via Coinlist.
Transactions & Market Structures
Market Maker Agreements & Deals
Projects must disclose all material terms of market-making arrangements that affect token liquidity. If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit. For each market maker, include in a table: (a) Market maker's name — the market maker's name; (b) Token allocation or loaned amount — the token allocation or loaned amount as a percentage of total supply; (c) Duration/term of agreement — the duration/term of the agreement; and, where applicable, (d) Name of agreement structure — label the financial vehicle being used in the agreement (i.e. loan, option/call, retainer model) without describing trading strategy or expected outcomes. If the project has no agreements or deals with market makers, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit. If no native tokens were loaned or allocated to market makers, state that explicitly; cash/fiat retainers or fees are not required for this item.
Market Maker Name | Token Allocation Committed | Term Duration | Structure Name |
|---|---|---|---|
N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown |
CEX / DEX Agreements & Deals
Projects must disclose all material terms of centralized or decentralized exchange listings that affect token liquidity. For each listing, include in a table: (a) Exchange name / DEX pool — the exchange name (and, for DEX, the specific pool/pair); (b) Token allocation for listing — the token allocation supplied or committed for listing as a percentage of total supply; (c) Term Duration — the duration/term of any listing lockups, liquidity, or incentive programs; and, where applicable, (d) Native-token listing fees — whether any listing fees were paid in native tokens, with amounts (tokens or % of supply), recipients, and any vesting or lock terms tied to the partnership. If the project has no agreements or deals with CEX or DEX, state that explicitly; doing so earns full credit; cash/fiat fee amounts are not required for this item.
Exchange Name | Token Allocation Committed | Term Duration | Native Token Listing Fees |
|---|---|---|---|
N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown | N/A no current listings, historic listings unknown |
Financial Disclosures & Risks
Prior Token Sales & Fundraising
Disclose all prior token sales by the Project — including fundraising rounds, any material OTC sales to investors, and any discounted market-maker sales. For each sale, provide: (a) Series Name; (b) Early-Stage Investment Instrument used (i.e. SAFT, STAMP, SAFE, SAFE+Token Warrant, etc.); (c) Date of sale (at least month & year); (d) Number of tokens sold (or % of total supply); (e) Vesting schedule. If no prior sales occurred, state that explicitly (e.g., "No prior fundraising, OTC, or discounted MM sales have occurred.").
Series Name | Investment Vehicle | Date Of Sale | Number of tokens sold | Vesting Schedule |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Community Sale through CoinList | ICO | 2021-04 | Mina Foundation announced 75,000,000 tokens at $0.25 per token, equivalent to $18.75 million. | The community sale MINA unlocked 100% on May 31, 2021. |
Strategic and institutional ecosystem fundraising | OTC Token Sale | 2022-02 to 2022-03 | The token-distribution post states that the Mina ecosystem raised $92 million from strategic and institutional backers. Number of MINA sold: o1Labs sold 21,121,456 MINA and Mina Foundation sold 19,471,883.55 MINA. | Tokens sold during this strategic round unlocked 50% after one year and 50% after two years from the date of the sale. |
Seed round | Equity + Token Warrant | (Q4 2017) Publicly announced in May 2018 | Raised $3.5 million, equivalent to 50,166,667 MINA tokens. | 18-month unlock from mainnet launch. All backer tokens remained fully locked until 40 days after the Community Sale; the first tranche became available when Community Sale tokens unlocked. |
Series A | Equity + Token Warrant | (Q4 2018) Publicly announced in April 2019 | Raised $15 million, equivalent to 100,000,000 MINA tokens. | 18-month unlock from mainnet launch, with the same initial restriction through 40 days after the Community Sale. |
Series A-1, A-2 | Equity + Token Warrant | Q3 2020 | Raised $10.9m, equivalent to 55,000,000 MINA tokens. | The Lock-Up for the Tokens distributed to Series A-1 Unit holders will be released as follows: 2.77778% of the Tokens will be released from the lock-up by the end of each 30 day period for the first 3 periods following the Distribution Date (mainnet launch) and 6.11111% of the Tokens will be released by the end of each 30 day period thereafter for remaining 15 periods, with all Tokens being released during the last period. |
Previous Exploits Affecting The Native Token
If any, list prior exploits or incidents that directly affected the token, token supply, tokenholder balances, token contract, minting controls, burn mechanics, or custody of token supply. This question is not asking about general protocol, application, or smart contract exploits unless the incident directly affected the native token itself. If no prior incidents, state this explicitly (e.g., "No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of YYYY-MM-DD").
- (a) Date & component affected — Date (YYYY-MM or YYYY-MM-DD), chain(s)/component affected.
- (b) Exploit vector summary — Plain-language summary of the exploit vector (what the hack was).
- (c) Quantified impact — Quantified impact (assets/tokens affected or a clear "no loss of funds" statement).
- (d) Remediation/response taken — Remediation/response taken (patches, upgrades, governance actions, compensation).
- (e) Current status — Current status (resolved, in litigation, under investigation, refunded, etc.).
- (f) References (optional) — Link(s) to post-mortem/advisory/PR.
(a) Date & component affected
No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of 2026-07-28
(b) Exploit vector summary
No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of 2026-07-28
(c) Quantified impact
No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of 2026-07-28
(d) Remediation/response taken
No exploits affecting tokenholders or protocol funds as of 2026-07-28
(e) Current status
No public exploit affecting protocol funds was identified in the cited sources reviewed for this filing as of 2026-04-22. The main public incident located in the reviewed source set is a devnet bug discovered on September 14, 2021; the official retro states that the bug was not discovered on mainnet, was not exploited, and no funds were compromised. The same retro states that engineers released an emergency upgrade, later shipped a broader follow-up fix, and added tests and transaction-pool checks to prevent comparable issues.
(f) References (optional)
N/A
Material Risk Factors (Regulation, Technology, Token Economics)
Describe material risk factors across the three categories below. Each category includes prompts to address at a minimum.
- (a) Regulatory, Legal & Tax Risks — Describe how evolving laws and regulations could affect the project by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
- Impact of Regulatory Change on TGE and Listings: (If applicable) How could evolving or conflicting laws and regulations affect your ability to complete the TGE, deliver tokens to purchasers, and list or maintain the token on trading venues in key jurisdictions?
- Entity-Level Regulatory Impact: (If applicable) How could regulatory or legal changes impact your core entities (Foundation, DevCo, DAO, affiliated service providers), including enforcement actions, licensing requirements, or forced changes to structure or operations?
- Tokenholder Tax Treatment: (If applicable) What uncertainties exist around how tokenholders may be taxed, and make clear that tokenholders are responsible for understanding their own tax obligations?
- Jurisdictional & User Access Restrictions: (If applicable) If the project restricts access for certain jurisdictions or user types (e.g., U.S. persons, sanctioned countries, retail vs. professional), what are those restrictions and what risks do they create for users and for the project?
- (b) Protocol, Technology & Security Risks — Describe risks to network and contract reliability, correctness, and safety by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
- Bugs and Design Flaws: (If applicable) What bugs, design flaws, or implementation errors could exist in your core protocol code, smart contracts, and any bridges, rollups, or oracles that you depend on, and how could these lead to loss of funds or disruption of the protocol?
- Security Measures & Their Limitations: (If applicable) What security measures have you taken (audits, formal verification, bug bounties), and what types of failures might these measures still fail to detect or prevent?
- (c) Token Economics, Unlocks & Incentive Risks — Describe how the token's economic design and supply schedule could affect holders by answering, at a minimum, questions like:
- Critical Economic Assumptions: (If applicable) Which economic assumptions (e.g., staking yields, fee revenue, liquidity incentives, MEV capture, demand for blockspace) are critical for protocol security, utility, and governance, and what happens if those assumptions fail?
- Governance Control over Monetary Policy & Rewards: (If applicable) To what extent can governance change monetary policy, fee parameters, or reward allocations (e.g., inflation rate, treasury flows, incentive programs), and how could such changes adversely affect tokenholders?
(a) Regulatory, Legal & Tax Risks
Public Mina materials show jurisdictional and compliance constraints around participation. The Genesis Program terms bar participation by sanctioned persons and various sanctioned jurisdictions and require KYC for Genesis members, while the token-distribution post states that the April 2021 Community Sale was conducted through CoinList to non-U.S. persons only. The current website terms also state that the site is governed by Swiss law and that disputes are to be resolved by Swiss courts. The Genesis terms further state that Mina Foundation does not provide investment, tax, or legal advice and that participants are responsible for determining their own tax obligations. Since Mina has already had a TGE, questions relating to risk to completion of a TGE are not applicable. As is the case with all decentralized protocols, there is a risk MINA could be delisted on one or more centralized exchanges. Additionally, the legal and regulatory environment is dynamic, and changes could have adverse consequences to the usability of such protocols and their associated cryptocurrencies. The tax treatment of activities such as staking is not settled law and may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction.
(b) Protocol, Technology & Security Risks
Mina's public materials emphasize advanced zero-knowledge cryptography, zkApps, staking, and SNARK-based operation, which implies engineering and implementation risk in the core protocol and application stack. The official 9/14 devnet retro shows that transaction-validation bugs can emerge in practice even before exploitation, and that Mina responded with an emergency upgrade, follow-up fixes, and new tests and transaction-pool checks
(c) Token Economics, Unlocks & Incentive Risks
The cited public record describes MINA as inflationary with no supply cap, with inflation beginning at 12% and trending toward 7%, which creates ongoing dilution risk for holders who do not stake or delegate. Although initial token allocations had industry standard vesting and lock provisions, all tokens are now unlocked (including without limitation tokens allocated under the Genesis program and to initial backers and core contributors). Mina's public governance and validator economics also depend on delegation, block rewards, and continued active participation by block producers and delegators. More recent public transition disclosures also create execution and control-transition risk because Mina Foundation says it has transferred prior responsibilities to o1Labs, is focusing on a decentralized treasury with a current working target of 55 million MINA, and cannot guarantee a final figure or timeline while legal and regulatory review continues.
This Token Transparency Filing is provided for general informational purposes only. Blockworks reviews completeness only and does not verify or warrant the accuracy of individual answers. Mina Protocol is solely responsible for the content, accuracy, and legality of its disclosures.