In the rush to complete decentralization, Vitalik Buterin shared an important reminder that is easy to forget: Stage 2 is not always safely unless the basic evidence system cannot be penetrated. He explained in a post, presenting an intense sports model, that moving very quickly to stage 2 without significantly enhancing the durability of the failure of failure in reality an average.
The form puts the following assumptions: It is likely that the failure of safety and vitality is likely to be equal, and each member of the Security Council has a 10 % independent failure. Multisig 4 of 7 is used in stage 0 and 6 out of 8 are used in the first stage. The possibility of breaking the evidence. With the increased possibility of the proof system failure, the results indicate that stage 0 or the first stage provides more safety than stage 2.
Only when the proof system is incredibly relied on (for example, stage 2 is the best option if the failure rate is 10 or less. Transfer to stage 2 with an uncomplicated or central proof system is the worst possible setting, as Burin indicates, because it combines the risks of legal inflammation, as it indicates that this model does not always apply to participation, as it indicates the possibility of participation, or combines participation in satisfaction, which makes Multisig settings are less effective in practice than the model.
However, the strong proof system is necessary for the 2st stage to be safer. Buterin suggests the use of SIGS for an proof system, which combines many separate proof systems as a temporary measure to reduce these risks. According to him, stage 2 is not the only important thing. In addition to Rollups, you should monitor the ecosystem tools for decentralization, such as L2BEAT, maturity of the proof system. Achieving real security involves a gradual alignment of governance and integrity of encryption; It is not the selection box.
