zer0luck.base.eth pfp

zer0luck.base.eth

@zer0luck

1884 Following
1134 Followers
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
🥳 MonadSpin = best monad spin in crypto. Try it! #farcaster #monad #airdrop
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Ready for some COCK and $EGGS action?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
https://x.com/parallel_evm/status/1900399982085366151?s=46 If we consider a way to improve this? 1. Agree in advance on a standard base-slot allocation rule between major services (services that support delegated designator) and use a namespace for each criterion. 2. When migrating to a new service, if there is a previous state value, initialize it by switching to cold storage (this is dangerous, so EOA should be aware of this when signing the authorization tuple list and manage it by setting a CLEAR_FLAG).
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Dan Romero pfp
Dan Romero
@dwr.eth
Big win for stablecoins today A reminder that Sherrod Brown (voted out) and Elizabeth Warren were the reason a bipartisan bill from the House last year never had a chance to see the Senate floor. Here's a rough overview of the bill: - Federal oversight in most cases - Increased transparency requirements and public disclosures, i.e. are stablecoins backed with real assets - Some compliance stuff Ultimately, will be a boon for fintech / tradfi adoption. Which will normalize using public blockchains for more practical stuff. I would expect in the medium term this benefits decentralized stablecoins like DAI. https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2025/03/11/latest-draft-of-u-s-stablecoin-bill-aims-to-split-power-between-state-and-federal-authorities
8 replies
54 recasts
254 reactions
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
I just minted my Faces of Farcaster. A custom, onchain art collection exclusively for Farcasters by @harmonybot and @sayangel
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Yeap quantum physics
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Neo pfp
Neo
@neoblockchain
🎉 Neo is riding the wave of decentralized social! 🎉 Join us in the #LuckyCast and grab your chance to win from a prize pool of over $8000 GAS ! 🗓️ Sign-up starts: Jan 20 ⏳ Sign-up ends: Jan 23 🔄 Recast to get this party started! 🚀 #Neo #SocialFi #Giveaway https://www.luckycast.xyz/
45 replies
181 recasts
162 reactions
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Web3 Hack Postmortem 2024 🔥 If you want to dive into the money laundering routes and RCA of Web3 security incidents in 2024, check out our report now! Announcing our 330-page annual report analyzing 204 Web3 exploits from 2024. Key contents: → Exploit statistics and root causes → Security audit correlations → Team responses and fund tracking → Security incident processes → Detailed case studies https://x.com/ChainLight_io/status/1880271914603848121 https://blog.chainlight.io/web3-hack-postmortem-2024-2b8ed0116c93
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
hey, how to recovery subscribe value? GGGG
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
EigenLayer has been of great help to researchers.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Why are mixed assets being moved to consolidated multi-sig accounts? Are there any related patterns?
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Unique Stake + Operator Sets model strengthens EigenLayer slashing security architecture, enabling independent AVS slashing and allowing operators to segment their risk exposure. I look forward to analyzing the implementation once completed.
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
consider it from a slashing perspective - in the previous deallocation example, if we slash the Operator by 50%, both the current allocation amount and pending deallocations will be reduced by the slashing ratio.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
If we deallocate about 50% for the Operator, it remains in a "Pending Deallocation" state as shown below. Similarly, a DEALLOCATION_DELAY is initiated.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
I've created a diagram to help easily understand how Magnitude changes based on Unique Stake Looking at allocation/deallocation, when allocating 2,000 Magnitude to the "EigenDA_EIGEN" Operator, it remains in a "Pending Allocation" state as shown below. In this case, the previously mentioned ALLOCATION_DELAY is initiated.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
Implementing delay mechanisms for Unique Stake Allocation, Deallocation, and Withdrawal actions protects against synchronous timing attacks. • ALLOCATION_DELAY: Creates a delay between when operators allocate stake to AVS and when it becomes a slashing target, giving stakers time to withdraw if they disagree with new allocations. • DEALLOCATION_DELAY: Implements a delay between stake deallocation and non-slashable status, allowing AVS time to execute slashing for past operations. • WITHDRAWAL_DELAY: establishes a delay between withdrawal requests and completion, during which stake remains a slashing target, enabling AVS to address past misconduct.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
The protocol uses Magnitude as an accounting unit to track the percentage of delegated stake assigned to each AVS. for example with each Operator total Magnitude fixed at 1x10^18, the sum of Magnitudes assigned across operators cannot exceed this value, preventing double allocation since AVS cannot slash the same stake.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
ELIP-002 addresses these issues by introducing the Unique Stake and Operator Sets Model. This model enables operators to allocate specific portions of their stakes to individual AVS, ensuring that slashing events remain isolated. For example, if an operator allocates 10% of their stake to AVS A and 20% to AVS B, slashing in AVS A only affects its 10% allocation, leaving AVS B's 20% untouched.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
zer0luck.base.eth pfp
zer0luck.base.eth
@zer0luck
The shared stake model had an issue: when operators joined multiple AVS, their delegated stake could be slashed by all chosen AVS. This exposed the same stake to multiple slashing risks, where slashing by one AVS could indirectly affect others. The model failed to guarantee AVS' access to slashable stakes when needed, requiring a global veto committee to prevent systematic slashing risks.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction