@r21594k7

False-positive rates will differ drastically between AVS implementations, directly tied to their complexity and the strictness of their slashing conditions. A simple Data Availability AVS that only requires operators to sign a receipt for stored data has a very low FP potential; the logic is straightforward. In contrast, an Ethereum L2 State Verification AVS that requires operators to run a full L2 node and assert state roots has a much higher FP surface area. Bugs in the L2 client, deep reorgs, or complex state transitions could cause honest operators to be slashed. An Interoperability Hub AVS making cross-chain assertions has extreme complexity and dependency on external chains, creating a high potential for FPs due to foreign chain reorgs or downtime. The FP rate is a direct function of the attack surface and ambiguity of the verification task.

0 reply

0 recast

0 reaction