Mar 14, 2021Liked by Ali ZK

This was such a fantastic read! You're really gifted at abstracting/explaining fairly complex concepts to a n00b like me!

Expand full comment

Great content! You are making complex things easier for the broader audience to understand them. Thank you.

Expand full comment
Dec 28, 2021·edited Dec 28, 2021Liked by Ali ZK

This was a great read. Thanks for writing it!

Also typo here:

"Bob may have bribed him to to this to hurt Alice" should be "bribed him to do this"

Expand full comment

another typo here: "then you assets are as secure as they would have been had you been transacting on layer-1 itself" should be "then your assets"

Expand full comment

This is so beautiful to read...

Expand full comment
Oct 25, 2021Liked by Ali ZK

What a good job. Thanks for your work.

Expand full comment
Apr 29, 2021Liked by Ali ZK

great read, thank you!

Expand full comment

You stated: "In plasma and state channels generally, the users are responsible in part or in whole about the safety of their funds and must be “watching” what is happening on layer-1’s contract in case the operator or another user tries to make a fraudulent exit." How is that different here? In an ORU, how do users know if an operator misreports something? Do they just have a script running that verifies the data reported back to L1, compared to their own data they know to be legit? How is "watching" not needed on ORU? Thx for the great article!

Expand full comment

Watching is needed, but the difference here is that:

- *anyone* can report fraud and be rewarded with a big bounty (coming from the operator's bond). It doesn't have to be the user being affected as in the case of state channels.

- compared to plasma, (a) the fraud reporting is not reliant on the cooperation on the part of the operator, and (b) in the case of interactive provers, enforcing fraud verification doesn't require the entire rollup state, in fact the rollup block production can even continue while a fraudulent tx is being disputed.

- Note that in the case of Plasma Cash specifically, the entire history of a user's coin is required to raise a fraud claim, so it's similar to channels in that respect in that the user herself must either custody its history (which grows really fast, can't be on-chain otherwise scalability degrades) and/or outsource that to someone.

So anyone can run the ORU node to follow along and submit a fraud claim automatically. You can imagine projects/businesses built atop the rollup running this node with the fraud reporting module attached and active. In fact, this actually comes as part of the ORU node package. They are running a node anyway as part of their business, so detecting and reporting fraud is basically free money if/when it happens.

Expand full comment