Ethereum is on the brink of a major transformation with a new verification system poised to revolutionize how transactions are processed. This system, rooted in zero-knowledge (ZK) proofs, promises to eradicate the conventional need to reprocess each blockchain transaction, marking a pivotal change.
What Does Ethereum’s New Proposal Involve?
Outlined in the draft proposal “Optional Execution Proofs” under EIP-8025, Ethereum’s latest model aims to replace full block re-execution with proof validation. This transition is currently under trial, signaling Ethereum’s march towards a future focused on efficient proof verification.
The 2026 roadmap designed by the Ethereum Foundation’s zkEVM team targets setting standards for execution witnesses and ensuring seamless program integrations. A crucial aspect is to balance these advancements with making verification costs manageable for network participants.
Will Technical Hurdles and Centralization Risks Arise?
Central to this initiative is the creation of an “Execution Witness” that tracks state changes and establishes a zero-knowledge proof. These proofs are essential for validators to confirm blocks. A notable technical advancement also includes the Enshrined Proposer-Builder Separation (ePBS) update, facilitating extended block verification periods.
Potential concerns are tied to high-performance hardware needs, as analysts suggest that verifying an Ethereum block could require around 12 GPU cards. The security of this model depends on multiple independent proof verifications.
Implications for Layer 1’s Scalability with Layer 2?
Emphasizing “statelessness,” the roadmap suggests verifying blocks without their full weight. This could enable home validators to engage fully, shortening synchronization time frames. Even heightened gas limits might become handleable, allowing for increased transaction volumes.
If base chain verification costs drop, Layer 2 projects could face challenges in distinguishing themselves solely on scalability, driving a shift towards offering unique features and capabilities.
Three directions stand out: broader adoption of proof verification could democratize system access, hardware-heavy proof production might edge towards centralization, and Layer 1’s infrastructure sharing could encourage Layer 2 to innovate further.
“Our focus remains on harmonizing technical standards and reducing hardware demands to stabilize costs,” stated a representative.
While still in its draft stage, immediate full-scale implementation of this model is improbable. It requires extensive testing, refining, and a well-rounded understanding of its operational framework.
