Scan to download
BTC $74,753.59 -1.22%
ETH $2,294.48 -2.65%
BNB $620.87 -1.89%
XRP $1.41 -0.97%
SOL $85.08 -1.61%
TRX $0.3335 +1.06%
DOGE $0.0941 -0.97%
ADA $0.2451 -1.52%
BCH $439.16 -1.48%
LINK $9.13 -2.42%
HYPE $41.71 -5.60%
AAVE $90.01 -19.47%
SUI $0.9384 -2.21%
XLM $0.1694 +0.36%
ZEC $302.45 -6.53%
BTC $74,753.59 -1.22%
ETH $2,294.48 -2.65%
BNB $620.87 -1.89%
XRP $1.41 -0.97%
SOL $85.08 -1.61%
TRX $0.3335 +1.06%
DOGE $0.0941 -0.97%
ADA $0.2451 -1.52%
BCH $439.16 -1.48%
LINK $9.13 -2.42%
HYPE $41.71 -5.60%
AAVE $90.01 -19.47%
SUI $0.9384 -2.21%
XLM $0.1694 +0.36%
ZEC $302.45 -6.53%

Vitalik: The quality of the underlying proof system of L2 networks is equally important and should gradually enter the second stage as it develops

2025-05-05 14:41:51
Collection

ChainCatcher news, in response to community member Daniel Wang's proposed naming label #BattleTested for the L2 network Stage 2, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik posted on the X platform stating: "This is a good reminder: the second stage is not the only factor affecting security; the quality of the underlying proof system is equally important. This is a simplified mathematical model that shows when to enter the second stage:

Each security council member has a 10% independent 'break' chance; we consider activity failure (refusal to sign or key unavailability) and security failure (signing the wrong thing or key being hacked) as equally likely; the goal: to minimize the likelihood of protocol collapse under the above assumptions.

Stage 0 security council is 4/7, Stage 1 is 6/8; please note that these assumptions are very imperfect. In reality, council members have 'common mode failures': they may collude, or all be coerced or hacked in the same way, etc. This makes both Stage 0 and Stage 1 more insecure than shown in the model, so entering Stage 2 earlier than the model suggests is the best choice.

Additionally, note that by turning the proof system itself into multiple independent systems via multi-signature, the probability of proof system collapse can be greatly reduced (this is what I advocated in previous proposals). I suspect that all Stage 2 deployments in the past few years will be like this. Considering this, here is the chart. The X-axis is the probability of proof system collapse. The Y-axis is the probability of protocol collapse. As the quality of the proof system improves, the optimal stage shifts from Stage 0 to Stage 1, and then from Stage 1 to Stage 2. Using a proof system of Stage 0 quality for Stage 2 is the worst.

In short, @l2beat ideally should showcase proof system audits and maturity metrics (preferably proof system implementations rather than the entire aggregation, so we can reuse them) and stages."

app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.