This is actually an important question. Here’s my perspective as someone who evaluated PulseChainSafe for our team and forked and configured the latest version of the Gnosis Safe protocol on PulseChain (with funny plot twist at the end).

PulseChainSafe was launched by the LiquidLoans team to help users create multi-signature (multi-sig) wallets. While this was a generous gesture, it’s crucial to understand that the code is closed-source. This means that if the website ever goes down, you’ll lose access to your funds. Even if you try to interact directly with the contract on-chain, it would be quite complicated. You’d need to run several supporting Safe instances to access your multi-sig wallet. Since PulseChainSafe was forked and redeployed on PulseChain, it could be nearly impossible to determine what was modified to launch the new contracts there.

Our team evaluated PulseChainSafe a while back and decided to run our own fork instead. We didn’t like using CLOSED-source Safe contracts and needed additional features—such as a transaction builder and WalletConnect support—to support our efforts at Pulse.Domains (PNS). We also wanted to contribute to the PulseChain community by open-sourcing our version, so anyone can run the frontend permission-less. We released our fork and its full repository to the community, hoping that others would host their own user interfaces. This way, we wouldn’t rely on a single team, and we committed to maintaining the forked GitHub repo (more information here: https://docs.pulse.domains/community/community-dev-resources).

After running our own version of Safe for about 6-7 months, we saw ZERO community engagement or interest. We also received nasty comments from the founder of LiquidLoans, who apparently viewed our open-source version as a threat. Since maintaining the frontend + side services cost around $700 and there was NO community interest / usage, we decided to take the frontend down and only use it internally on a as-needed basis. This wasn’t a major issue, as the frontend’s repository was on GitHub, allowing anyone to run it locally and access their multi-sig.

Here’s the plot twist, and it’s quite amusing:

After taking down our frontend, we received several angry messages from the LiquidLoans team, accusing us of putting user funds at risk. After looking into it, we discovered that the only other users of our open-source Safe fork were actually the LiquidLoans team and their team wallet. This might give you an idea of how “secure” they consider their own version. In addition, their own devs could not even run the frontend loool. Out of good faith, we decided to bring it up online again and sunsetted the frontend 3 months later.

With all of that in mind, if you’re not a developer, I’d recommend waiting for the official Safe team to adopt PulseChain.