Sure, there’s risks to early technology, but are we really that early at this point? It’s been a decade since the first smart contracts launched.
It all boils down to design. From a decade ago to today, smart contract networks are designed to have no respect for the application layer. Exploits happen because chains inherently allow them. Conversation around security is focused on the protocol layer, which is foundational, but not enough.Our methodology of safe blockspace changes this, and the Safe Sequencer is the first component.Let’s run through what "no respect” means and how it works today on your favorite chain, whether that’s Ethereum, Base, …., versus how it works on safe blockspace.
When you have assets in DeFi, think of it as yourself on a plane. Anyone can board this plane, as long as they pass the airport security checkpoint first. Let’s take Bob for example.
Bob walks through the security checkpoint machine, but it's not scanning his body for weapons or bombs, instead it is only validating he is human.
The border agent asks him, “why are you traveling?”, an empty question to fill the silence as they scan Bob’s flight ticket, ensuring he has paid for a seat on the plane.
Bob answers, “I’m going to blow up this plane”. The border agent doesn’t blink. Instead, they wave him through, “ok be on your way, enjoy your trip”. The scans have completed and validated Bob for the two conditions required to board the plane:
(1)they are human
(2) they paid for a flight ticket
This person [Bob] has met both objective requirements.
How comfortable are you on this plane?
Alright, now replace “person” with transaction. As incredulously stupid as it sounds, this mirrors how a chain works today. A transaction is sent, the security checkpoint it goes through simply makes sure it is cryptographically valid via ECSDA recovery, or ecrecover().
This has no concerns about the intent of the transaction. Intent is completely ignored. Here is its checklist:
This is not theoretical in any sense, it is fact. The evidence is in both the software client code, and the lives drained away onchain repeatedly. I lay this out as an explanation of the how. How, even with all the audits, developer terror, and money poured into “security”, using DeFi is not safe.
The environment smart contracts live in is toxic. As seen in this analogy, it lacks the most basic consideration for the applications or its users. Isn’t it all a bit insane?
Now comes the seemingly common sense idea; what if we start inspecting a transaction for its intent? No blind inclusion. Cough Safe Sequencer Cough.
This is the Safe Sequencer. We embedded our A.I. model and other pattern recognition into the EVM and blockchain execution client to filter out malicious transactions at run-time. It adds this line item to the standard checklist:
By inspecting the intent of all proposed state changes, it adds a critical new dimension to the app and execution layer that is always at the service of everyone who is a user of the chain. Everyone who is already sitting on that plane. (You, probably).
I’ll talk more on the technicals of that next week. For now, let’s focus on why do this at the sequencer.
Think of it this way, the sequencer literally controls what enters the state of the chain. Somebody cannot rob assets onchain without going through it*. It is the best place to setup a checkpoint from both the perspectives of a product, and a computer science problem. It has the sole capability to both inspect and reject malicious state.
The technique we have championed is known as “dynamic analysis”. The art of runtime security, which crypto severely lacks today. Most user and app security focuses on pre-deployment techniques, such as audits or formal verification, all useful but clearly not enough.
Dynamic analysis, and our specific implementation offers a novel mechanism of safety.
Formal verification really had its moment in the sun the last couple years, mostly driven by the false love of the MoveVM. While FV is useful, it has a couple of major downfalls:
it suffers from human error, relying on the spec of a smart contract to be defined correctly
it runs into the state [or path] explosion problem, there’s too many potential combination paths through a program to explore them all, so it doesn’t. Meaning it is quite impossible to mathematically verify a set of smart contracts as FV claims to do
This is exactly why DeFi app Raft Finance was robbed of $4,000,000 even though its smart contracts were formally verified.
In-contrast, consider our implementation of dynamic analysis via the Safe Sequencer:
it’s an A.I. model that learns and self-decides what a smart contract’s proper functionality is meant to be, it doesn’t rely on a spec. Instead it relies on data and state properties
it only needs to validate transactions submitted to the chain are not exploitative. These are the only paths it needs to explore. From an infinite, to a very finite set of states. Existing at the last point of entry is an auto-filter
It’s a clever solution. Do I really care if there’s a $10M vulnerability in a smart contract if nobody ever attempts to execute the exploit? I do not. State explosion problem solved, maximally efficient 🧠.
Our Safe Sequencer solved these properties because it is fairly innovative. I mean we developed then shoved an A.I. model right into our rust blockchain client, made it a part of the EVM. But have no fear — it’s wrapped up to be easy for you, users of DeFi, to take advantage though. Simply put your assets on safe blockspace.
The Safe Sequencer is just the tip of the spear of what we have built with safe blockspace, but alone it offers significant advances over how chains work today. Seeing it in action is magical, an experience that will be shared next week with the beginning of “proof of tech”.
I have seen confusion on what sort of attacks it handles or how to understand what our focus is from Day 1. Short answer: we protect assets in smart contracts.
Think about it, today your assets are in a smart contract. Earning yield, being lent out, maybe serving as collateral, LP’ing in an AMM or farming some token rewards.
These assets are completely exposed to any hacker who walks up to the chain and says, “hey, here’s some money for gas, I found a bug and I’m going to steal all the users deposits from this smart contract”.
The chain shrugs and says “thanks for the gas money buddy, I’ll slot you into the next block”.
Poof, your money is gone.
This is how disrespectful it is. Smart contract networks are valuable because of DeFi, yet a chain does not care about it in any form. Pretty ripe for disruption, if you ask me.
The Safe Sequencer gives you peace of mind while having assets in DeFi. Silently filtering out the malicious attempts to enter the chain, to enter that plane, that your networth is sitting on.
Note the fundamental change in approach we take, the chain itself now programmatically cares about its users. The question you should start to ask yourself — would I rather have my assets on Safe Blockspace, or on the default brutally exposed version that is every chain today?
footnote: *besides forced inclusion via the L1, which we elegantly handle. A very fun technical topic for another day
.webp)
