Key Takeaways:
- Ethereum’s decentralization faces risks from large stakers, posing threats of 51% attacks and transaction censorship.
- Vitalik Buterin highlights concerns over block construction and staking, emphasizing the need to reduce centralization.
- Proposed solutions like inclusion lists and BRAID aim to minimize market manipulation in Ethereum’s network.
In a recent blog post, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin discussed the challenges that are likely to persist in the Ethereum protocol well into the future. In a post titled “The Scourge,” he discussed the increasingly greater risks of centralization in Ethereum’s proof-of-stake (PoS) system, a core element of the Network.
Centralization would imply that large stakers control the block construction space and may later create transaction censorship, 51% attacks, and centralization of authority on the network. According to Buterin, such threats would make any hope of Ethereum being a decentralized world computer not quite workable.
He lists two threats: block construction centralization and staking capital provision. Large actors can apply sophisticated algorithms to extract the maximum value per block, making the small stakers merge with the large pools, hence deepening centralization.
Liquid staking tokens (LSTs) further complicate the matter, allowing these large actors to bypass the restrictions of locked-up capital.
Fixing Ethereum’s Block Construction to Preserve Decentralization
This has subsequently made the process of Ethereum block construction a field of contention for centralization. Currently, the majority of blocks are under the control of two actors using MEVBoost-a system responsible for the auctioning off of block contents to maximize profits.
This eventually led to heavy market manipulation, in which large builders gained an edge, adding to Ethereum’s centralization problem. To address this, Buterin proposes inclusion lists and BRAID. Inclusion lists would allow validators to vet transactions while builders may still reorder them.
BRAID, in turn, distributes block production among a set of participants, limiting the sophistication needed to be profitable. Again, both methods try to avoid centralization while balancing the advantages of economies of scale.
Staking: Risks of Over-concentration
Another major concern that Buterin showed is the increasing concentration of staked ETH, which is alarming because about 30% of the ETH supply is already staked. If the staking keeps on expanding, the risk of centralization could increase.
The issue arises when the stakers in the network are over-incentivized. The stakers delegate their tokens to a few large, centralized operators. Such a situation results in a negative spiral of centralization that undermines Ethereum’s security and credibility.
Buterin then proceeds to enumerate a set of potential solutions for introducing upper limits on staking at some sort of threshold or emulating two-tier models of staking, whereby one layer takes on more risk for better rewards.
These are meant to help further protect Ethereum from centralization risks and ensure the network remains secure and decentralized.
Related Reading | Is Shiba Inu the Next Bitcoin? Retail Investors Think So