Cross chain bridge Ethereum

The attack was on the Ronin Bridge, a feature that allows users to move assets between Ronin and Ethereum. This attack proved that even if the future of crypto assets becomes “multi-chain”, it is unlikely that it will become “cross-chain” for some people involved in crypto assets.

With the continued outflow from Ethereum to various blockchains that are faster and cheaper but more centralized, this attack also reminded us of the importance of decentralization.

Ronin is a side chain that runs parallel to Ethereum. Sky Mavis, the creator of the super-popular Play-to-Earn (P2E) game “Axie Infinity,” will be in 2020, and Ethereum’s base layer will have everything it needs to support this popular game. Judging that it was too slow and too expensive to make a deal, he developed Ronin.

Bridges such as Ronin usually work by locking up crypto assets to smart contracts on one chain and issuing “wrapped” tokens on the destination chain.

For example, if you want to use the Ronin Bridge Smart Contract Development Services to move Ether (ETH) from Ethereum to Ronin, the ETH will be locked up on Ethereum to support the wrapped Ether (WETH) issued by Ronin on a one-to-one basis. used.

Bridges are a good target for attacks because too many assets are locked up in one place. The criminal who attacked Ronin secured 5 of the 9 validator keys entrusted with ensuring the security of the Ronin Network and attacked.

By holding a majority of the keys, it was possible to move large amounts of crypto assets directly from the Ronin Bridge to the Ethereum wallet.

As soon as the full story of the attack on Ronin was revealed, it jumped to the top of Rekt’s ranking, which ranks attacks on the DeFi protocol in order of damage amount since 2020.

Ronin isn’t the first and probably not the last time a large amount of crypto assets have been stolen from the crypto bridge. The attack on the crypto asset bridge is also ranked second and third after Ronin in the Rekt ranking.

Third place was the February attack on the Wormhole Bridge, which cost $ 331 million. The August 2021 attack on the Poly Network, which hackers stole $ 611 million and eventually returned, ranks second.

Risk across chains

With hundreds of millions of dollars stolen again from the crypto bridge, some have argued that the attack on Ronin is a further testament to the failure of the “crosschain” in the crypto community. Is done.

The Ethereum community also cites the words of Ethereum creator Vitalik Buterin, who spoke about the limits of cross-chain bridges in January.

“The fundamental security limitations of the bridge are the reason I’m optimistic about the multi-chain blockchain ecosystem, but … pessimistic about cross-chain applications,” Buterin said. rice field.

Sending assets over a Cross chain bridge development will never carry the same security guarantees as trading within an individual blockchain ecosystem, Buterin said in a long 900-word statement. explained.

Buterin’s criticism of the cross-chain bridge is primarily due to the fact that he is particularly vulnerable to 51% attacks similar to those against Ronin. If a bridge is attacked on one blockchain and funds are stolen, users on the other blockchain on the other side of the bridge will also be affected. Only unsupported tokens will be left at hand.

“If you have 100 chainser, thier is many different types of interdependent Dapps (decentralized apps) between them, and a 51% attack on one chain threatens the economy of the entire ecosystem. Will have a ripple effect on the entire system, “Buterin explained.

Sky Mavis sought to expand its ability to operate on Ethereum by developing the sidechain Ronin. However, scaling a Layer 1 blockchain through a sidechain always requires a bridge and is not as secure as scaling through a solution such as a rollup that inherits the security guarantee from the Layer 1 chain.

Value of decentralization

Beyond highlighting the shortcomings of the cross-chain bridge, the attack on Ronin confirmed a core claim among Ethereum supporters. This is a shared belief among Bitcoiners and crypto idealists that true decentralization is essential to the success of any crypto ecosystem.

Decentralization, combined with the political claims and ideologies of crypto fans, has been described as a promise to regain power from ruler organizations and intermediaries to the general public.

These claims about the philosophical virtues of decentralization are appealing to some,Build a cross chain bridge but sick of those who think blockchain is as perishable as any other technology.

In addition, more and more crypto asset projects are emerging, believing that current users don’t care about decentralization as long as they can trade cheaply and fast.

The attack on Ronin reminds us that decentralization has practical security implications for applications that involve huge amounts of money, regardless of what the user thinks.

Sky Mavis left Ethereum to create Ronin to speed up transactions and reduce costs. It served its purpose (Ronin processed 500% more transactions than Ethereum at peak times), but with a centralized Proof-of-Authority model in which only nine validators are responsible for the security of the entire network. It had become vulnerable to attacks.

Ethereum has major weaknesses in terms of scalability, and the slow transition to Ethereum 2.0 has created room for more centralized chains such as Ronin to emerge in need.

Still, as the major update for Ethereum 2.0 approaches, the attack on Ronin shows why the daunting task of massive decentralization remains important.