Change the IPFS resolution of uniswap.eth from to uniswap-uncensored.eth


We have people creating uncensored builds of the UI which are just following Uniswap Labs ones but without the block list.
Let’s use this for uniswap.eth instead of
To do so create a multisig validating uncensored builds of uniswap made by peoples like @Micah and point uniswap.eth to an ENS that this multisig control.
Then when a new version is made, someone publish it, the multisig review it, and it if it’s fine then the multisig approve the change updating uniswap.eth.


Recently uniswap labs updated the UI to stop supporting lots of tokens, some obviously makes sense like Tether Gold which is bugged and lock liquidity forever.
But most tokens are just what the US regulator would likely classify as securities such as :

  • mAssets (mTSLA, mGOOGL, … thoses are synthetixs of shares)
  • Synths.

There for me multiple issues with this:

  • This applies to everyone, even outside of the US juridiction. (there might be some legal ground about that, maybe since Uniswap Labs is in the US they must apply thoses regulations even to non US “customers”)
  • The message is a missleading “unsupported token” instead of “This is not supported on this gateway, pls use an other gateway”.

So ok the uniswap labs team doesn’t want or can’t deal with the legal implications of this. Then let just find someone else who does.

Well @Micah is willing to do it. This is just a fork of the Uniswap Lab’s UI but with the list removed.

Technically, we just update the IPFS field of uniswap.eth to ipns://uniswap-UI-multisig.eth, instead of ipns://

That would change the resolution of:

We would also need to have a multisig checking releases, because for example if we just point it to ipns://uniswap-uncensored.eth well that would work, but @Micah would have full control over the code that is distributed, which isn’t very decentralised.

Sadly wouldn’t get updated as it’s uniswap.eth redirecting to not the reverse.

That pretty much it.
As is this wouldn’t have much impact, because very few people uses uniswap.eth, but it would be simple to advertise instead, it’s from the governance and should be as safe.


Having a multi-sig of names sounds a little risky for those individuals, if this is for a non-regulatory compliant version of a UI.

I think there could be an interesting application built that would create a unique fork for every user who is looking to use Uniswap protocol. i.e. everyone can launch their own IPFS attestation of uniswap UI (user A pushes button that launches a IPFS of latest UI that can be used and reused; bonus if the user can also customize the UI background logo etc to their own personalization). Just an idea.

I like the idea. Even if it’s mostly symbolic I also welcome an official IPFS build with the country and token blocklists disabled. I host a frontend mirror on (which I’ll need to update, last update from 13 days ago) where I remove the blocklists but as already written by @Jorropo , having a multisig “verified” build on IPFS would be a lot more decentralized then having a single user host the build.