4 ms·
One thing to be aware of with Binance. As far as I understand, most of the transactions occur on their own ethereum-compatible-but-not-quite-ethereum chain call
by seanhunter 4y ago
One thing to be aware of with Binance. As far as I understand, most of the transactions occur on their own ethereum-compatible-but-not-quite-ethereum chain called the "Binance Smart Chain". While having these sidechains can improve scalability and reduce costs (they are just another form of sharding), this presumably introduces an additional point of potential failure compared with regular centralised exchanges: not only can the exchange fail to honour withdrawals, but the bridge between the chains could also fail to honour transfers out from the Binance smart chain back to the ethereum mainnet.
There is also an additional potential point of misaccounting/fraud and also theft. What's supposed to happen with bridges is say I want to move some token from the mainnet to BSC, I send the token to the bridge on mainnet and it issues me the token on the BSC side. However, mainnet doesn't know anything about the existance of BSC so the token on the mainnet side still exists and is still a valid token on the mainnet. Likewise when I move stuff from BSC to mainnet the same thing happens - a residual token is created out of thin air on the side which the "real" asset is leaving. Now good actors should burn this token (move it to an address that noone has the private key to so it is put permanently beyond use) to make it go away but there is a lot of temptation to not do this because if you mess up or something otherwise goes wrong there is no going back. You can't "unburn" things. So rather than burning, people often put stuff into a special holding address and sort of triple pixie promise they won't double-spend it. This can also help legitimately reduce cost because next time you need to create the token on this side of the bridge you can instead take one out of this store and use that instead. You can see the problem presumably? If someone bad (either internally or via a hack) gets access to the keys to this address their motives might not be pure and suddenly they have a large amount of seemingly valid assets they can just take. This is part of what happened with the "Ronin" hack of Axie Infinity - they managed to phish a private key of the bridge and steal assets that had been bridged between networks. https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/29/tech/axie-infinity-ronin-hack/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2022/03/29/tech/axie-infinity-ronin-...
- pavlov 4y agoHow is this kind of sidechain any better than just having your transactions recorded in a boring old private SQL database? The Axie Infinity hack suggests that these private chains are the worst of all worlds: they're effectively controlled by a single entity, but also far more susceptible to hacks than a well-understood traditional database. The blockchain part seems to be a pure marketing decoy that's worse than useless because it's actively harmful to customers.
- SentientAtom 4y agoYour question is just "what is the purpose of the blockchain" but with more words.
- tim333 4y agoI think seanhunter has got Binance Smart Chain a little wrong - it's just a fork of Ethereum with basically the same functions. There's a coin BNB which is like Eth and you can issue other tokens, NFTs etc on it.
- seanhunter 4y agoI said Binance Smart Chain was an Ethereum fork. My point is to move things from the eth mainnet to or from it you need a bridge, which, looking at this[1] looks like there is a bridge which they control. The problems I mentioned are intrinsic to bridges. [1] https://www.bnbchain.org/en/bridge https://www.bnbchain.org/en/bridge