Understanding the Safe Protocol

Oct 13, 2025 by miodeya.com 3 views

Introduction

The Safe UI is a user-friendly interface for interacting with the Safe protocol, a decentralized platform for secure and transparent transactions. However, users have reported encountering an error when attempting to propose a multisend transaction from the Safe SDK, citing that the DELEGATE_CALL operation is not allowed. This is because it is disabled in the transaction service. But then, how are users able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI when DELEGATE_CALL is disabled? In this article, we will delve into the reasons behind this discrepancy and explore the implications for Safe users.

Understanding the Safe Protocol

Before we dive into the specifics of the Safe UI and the DELEGATE_CALL operation, it's essential to understand the underlying protocol. The Safe protocol is a decentralized platform that enables secure and transparent transactions. It allows users to create, manage, and execute transactions in a trustless and permissionless manner. The protocol is built on top of the Ethereum blockchain and utilizes a unique architecture that enables the creation of secure and transparent transactions.

The Role of Delegate Call

The DELEGATE_CALL operation is a critical component of the Safe protocol. It enables users to execute arbitrary Ethereum contracts on the Safe platform. This operation is used to interact with external contracts and execute specific functions. However, the DELEGATE_CALL operation is not without its risks. It can be used to execute malicious code, which can compromise the security of the Safe platform.

Why is Delegate Call Disabled in the Transaction Service?

Given the risks associated with the DELEGATE_CALL operation, it's not surprising that it's disabled in the transaction service. The transaction service is responsible for validating and executing transactions on the Safe platform. By disabling the DELEGATE_CALL operation, the transaction service can prevent malicious code from being executed and ensure the security of the platform.

So, How Are Users Able to Create Batch Transactions on the Safe UI?

Given that the DELEGATE_CALL operation is disabled in the transaction service, it's puzzling that users are still able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI. There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy:

Batch Transactions are Not Executed on the Safe Platform: It's possible that batch transactions created on the Safe UI are not executed on the Safe platform. Instead, they may be executed on a separate platform or using a different protocol.
Batch Transactions Use a Different Operation: It's possible that batch transactions use a different operation than DELEGATE_CALL. This operation may not be subject to the same restrictions as DELEGATE_CALL and can be used to execute batch transactions.
Safe UI is Using a Different Implementation: It's possible that the Safe UI is using a different implementation of the Safe protocol than the transaction service. This implementation may not have the same restrictions as the transaction service and can allow users to create batch transactions.

Implications for Safe Users

The discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service has significant implications for Safe users. If users are able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI, but these transactions are not executed on the Safe platform, it can lead to confusion and mistrust. Users may not understand the implications of creating batch transactions on the Safe UI and may not be aware of the potential risks associated with these transactions.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service is puzzling. While the DELEGATE_CALL operation is disabled in the transaction service, users are still able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI. There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy, including the possibility that batch transactions are not executed on the Safe platform, use a different operation, or are using a different implementation of the Safe protocol. Regardless of the explanation, the implications for Safe users are significant and highlight the need for greater transparency and clarity in the Safe protocol.

Recommendations

To address the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service, we recommend the following:

Provide Clear Guidance: Safe should provide clear guidance on the implications of creating batch transactions on the Safe UI. This guidance should include information on the potential risks associated with these transactions and the implications for users.
Implement a Consistent Protocol: Safe should implement a consistent protocol across all interfaces, including the Safe UI and the transaction service. This will ensure that users understand the implications of creating batch transactions and can make informed decisions.
Increase Transparency: Safe should increase transparency in the Safe protocol, including the use of batch transactions and the implications for users. This will help to build trust and confidence in the Safe platform.

Future Work

To address the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service, we recommend the following future work:

Conduct a Thorough Review: Safe should conduct a thorough review of the Safe protocol, including the use of batch transactions and the implications for users. This review should identify areas for improvement and provide recommendations for addressing the discrepancy.
Implement a New Protocol: Safe should implement a new protocol that addresses the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service. This protocol should provide clear guidance on the implications of creating batch transactions and ensure that users understand the potential risks associated with these transactions.
Increase Testing and Validation: Safe should increase testing and validation of the Safe protocol, including the use of batch transactions. This will help to ensure that the protocol is secure and reliable and that users can trust the Safe platform.

Conclusion

Introduction

In our previous article, we explored the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service, where users are able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI despite the DELEGATE_CALL operation being disabled. In this article, we will answer some of the most frequently asked questions related to this topic.

Q: What is the purpose of the Delegate Call operation?

A: The DELEGATE_CALL operation is a critical component of the Safe protocol, enabling users to execute arbitrary Ethereum contracts on the Safe platform. This operation is used to interact with external contracts and execute specific functions.

Q: Why is Delegate Call disabled in the transaction service?

A: The DELEGATE_CALL operation is disabled in the transaction service due to the risks associated with it. It can be used to execute malicious code, which can compromise the security of the Safe platform.

Q: How are users able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI?

A: There are several possible explanations for this discrepancy, including:

Batch Transactions are Not Executed on the Safe Platform: It's possible that batch transactions created on the Safe UI are not executed on the Safe platform. Instead, they may be executed on a separate platform or using a different protocol.
Batch Transactions Use a Different Operation: It's possible that batch transactions use a different operation than DELEGATE_CALL. This operation may not be subject to the same restrictions as DELEGATE_CALL and can be used to execute batch transactions.
Safe UI is Using a Different Implementation: It's possible that the Safe UI is using a different implementation of the Safe protocol than the transaction service. This implementation may not have the same restrictions as the transaction service and can allow users to create batch transactions.

Q: What are the implications for Safe users?

A: The discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service has significant implications for Safe users. If users are able to create batch transactions on the Safe UI, but these transactions are not executed on the Safe platform, it can lead to confusion and mistrust. Users may not understand the implications of creating batch transactions on the Safe UI and may not be aware of the potential risks associated with these transactions.

Q: How can Safe address this discrepancy?

A: Safe can address this discrepancy by:

Providing Clear Guidance: Safe should provide clear guidance on the implications of creating batch transactions on the Safe UI. This guidance should include information on the potential risks associated with these transactions and the implications for users.
Implementing a Consistent Protocol: Safe should implement a consistent protocol across all interfaces, including the Safe UI and the transaction service. This will ensure that users understand the implications of creating batch transactions and can make informed decisions.
Increasing Transparency: Safe should increase transparency in the Safe protocol, including the use of batch transactions and the implications for users. This will help to build trust and confidence in the Safe platform.

Q: What is the future of the Safe protocol?

A: The future of the Safe protocol is uncertain, but it's clear that Safe needs to address the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service. By implementing a consistent protocol, increasing transparency, and providing clear guidance, Safe can build trust and confidence in the Safe platform and ensure its continued success.

Q: How can users protect themselves from the risks associated with batch transactions?

A: Users can protect themselves from the risks associated with batch transactions by:

Understanding the Implications: Users should understand the implications of creating batch transactions on the Safe UI and the potential risks associated with these transactions.
Using a Secure Wallet: Users should use a secure wallet to store their funds and prevent unauthorized access.
Monitoring Their Transactions: Users should monitor their transactions regularly to detect any suspicious activity.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the discrepancy between the Safe UI and the transaction service is a complex issue that requires a comprehensive solution. By providing clear guidance, implementing a consistent protocol, and increasing transparency, Safe can address this discrepancy and build trust and confidence in the Safe platform. Users can also protect themselves from the risks associated with batch transactions by understanding the implications, using a secure wallet, and monitoring their transactions regularly.