jakiro
Author: SSV core team co -founder Adam Efrima, Blockworks; compile: five baht, Bitchain Vision
Eigenlayer is the biggest supporter and embodiment of the pledge, and it is starting to get rid of its auxiliary wheel.After a short -term cancellation of the pledge limit of the liquid pledge tokens (LST), ETH locking the total value used for “re -pledge” soared from US $ 2.1 billion to $ 11.5 billion.
The core of pledge is to improve capital efficiency.
ETH is an extremely extensive and liquid asset, which makes it an ideal choice to guide the new rights and interest proof (POS).The transaction is simple: the new network has gained significant security since the first day, and ETH pledges can use the same assets they already have to earn additional income.
The pledge is rapidly becoming a buzzword, and the current cautious attitude of the Eigenlayer team keeps it relatively mild in terms of total value locking numbers.As a relatively new pledge mechanism, it has enhanced the existing liquidity pledge protocols such as LIDO, Rocket POOL, and FRAX. It is expected to release billions of dollars of additional value in a wider pledge industry.But like any new encrypted original language,Some people worry that re -pledge may threaten the stability of Ethereum and cryptocurrencies itself.
Some of these concerns may not be based on -for example, concerns about financial stability.Other risks, technical risks, are reasonable, but are seriously exaggerated.Critics believe that most Ethereum injected into the pledge agreement may lead to unnecessary and dangerous superposition of these technical risks.But the fact is that not accepting pledge may face greater risks.
How to improve the financial stability of Ethereum
The pledge provides a good way to finally release LST potential, which can improve ETH’s security.It is important to remember that in addition to convenience, the existence of LST has an important structural reason, which is directly conducive to the safety of Ethereum.
in short,The pledge yield on Ethereum competes with DEFI yields.The lending agreement and liquidity pool can provide more significant benefits than about 4% ETH pledge.If the average yield of ETH is significantly higher than the number (this is easy to occur in a particularly active market), then only a small amount of ETH supply will be specially used for pledge to make the network more vulnerable.
With LST, ETH holders do not need to make a choice: they can earn the benchmark ETH pledge yield at any time. If they are willing to take risks, they can also increase their income through DEFI yields.
Unfortunately, in the current environment, holding LST seems to be the only thing you can do.The use of LST in DEFI is mainly limited to easily redeeming conventional ETH, while Defi trading use is extremely limited -according to UNISWAP analysis, ETH’s transaction volume is more than 10 times that of the WSTH of Lido.
Pure can solve this problem and provide another potential source of income for ETH holders, which should naturally make pledge more competitive than DEFI.The end result is that the Internet wins, because more ETH is pledged.
Is there a financial risk in pledge?
It is worth noting that re -pledge is a strict technical practice -assets deposited in Eigenlayer are retained in the system and will never lend to anyone else.Although it sounds similar to “re -pledge”, the pledge is a completely different mechanism that does not provide financial risks at all.It is worth noting,At present, EigenLayer is the only important participant in the field of Ethereum and retraction. The future agreement may provide different risk conditions.
Eigenlayer is a decentralized protocol. If you entrust it to the defective Eigenlayer operator, there is a risk of losing LST value.Therefore, cumulative risks also depend on the community of stakeholders to conduct their own due diligence, similar to the current LST market products.
The liquidity custody (LRT) may cause confusion, which is the financial eigenlayer position -the ETH LST LST, which is essentially deposited in the EIGENLAYER protocol.The common questions of Eigenlayer mentioned LST liquidation. In this case, this explanation may be more disadvantaged than benefits.
In practice, it is important to pay attention to these risks completely outside the agreement.If the user deposits its LRT into the lending agreement to enter the leveraged position, its liquidation is entirely an external event.Although the potential of leverage is deposited into LRT due to the potential of leverage, the level of risk is unlikely to reach a disaster level.
Just as no one is worried about Ethereum or Lido during the decouplery of STETH in 2022, no one should worry about the Eigenlayer user being cleared.In this case, others will control their assets and the system will continue to run.In addition, the decoupling of STETH occurs before the pledged ETH is extracted, which means that it is impossible to make major arbitrage.
Is the technical risk of re -pledge?
It is reasonable to worry about re -pledge technology.After all, the failure of the EIGENLAYER protocol (or other similar protocols) may bring major losses to the entire ETH holder community.Excessive reduction and loss of control of pledge, malicious applications, etc. are all risks that ETH holders may face when pledged again.
But it is important to understand the background of technical risks.The implementation of the new agreement always has the risk of technical failure, which is the risk of the community that needs to understand and reduce.Each upgrade in Ethereum will cause similar concerns -due to the subtle errors in implementation, the merger itself may make an error.
Continuous audit, error bounty, training wheel, and active agreement monitoring are part of the deep defense security model. This model can prevent losses and minimize it when losses occur.Ordinary old redundancy achieved through competitors’ solutions can also be used to reduce the risks caused by improper implementation of re -pledge.
Some people may think that the pledge will unnecessary to increase the complexity of Ethereum consensus.This makes sense, but this risk must be viewed in the context of not enough ETH pledge.
By controlling a certain percentage of active rights, Ethereum may gradually paralyzed.When the attacker controls more than 50% of the equity, they can cause slight review and reorganization, and the rights and interests of more than 66% give them full control.If only 1% ETH supply is used for pledge, the attacker only needs to add 1% to control 50% of the pledge capacity.
At present, only 26% of the supply is pledged. In theory, the attacker only needs to obtain 13% of the total supply of ETH, which can reach 33% of the pledged ETH share, thereby paralyzing the network.This is equivalent to just over 56 billion US dollars -less than ETH’s three -day daily trading volume.Although this number has multiple warnings -for example, the net purchase pressure of $ 56 billion will be significantly increased by ETH -but these numbers are surprisingly low for global neutral settlement layers.
Re -pledged and DVT can completely reduce consensus risk
The greatness of pledge is that it is an extremely modular and decentralized architecture.All equity is isolated into their respective applications, and some of them are always used to verify Ethereum.It is also easy to implement decentralized verification device technology (DVT) in each EIGENLAYER service (they call it AVS).
DVT can scatter the control of the verification device to multiple entities with an authenticated and encrypted security mechanism.Since the verificationrs are responsible for generating and accepting new blocks, they are the source of “power” in the Ethereum network.Attacks need to control verification. Although controlling ETH equity is one of the important aspects, entities that accept other people’s rights have more power than expected.
If the authentication of the verification device binds to EIGENLAYER and related equity are securely allocated and managed through the DVT protocol, the risk of the entire system failure will be significantly reduced.This will also greatly reduce the risk of large -scale reduction of large -scale reduction of large -scale verification device.
If it is re -adopted, most ETH supply will be pledged -at the same time assigned to a group of organic and decentralized authenticants -Ethereum may be much safer than it is now.
Like any new idea, the pledge agreement requires a long running -in period to ensure its technical security, but in addition, they are very hopeful to become the next main original of the Ethereum infrastructure -it may even be necessary.
