Ethereum: what are the disadvantages of potentially subopim or unused operating codes?
While the Ethereum community continues to explore new possibilities and updates for the virtual machine of Ethereum (EVM), allowing potentially subopimal or unused operational codes in a future soft bifurcation has expressed concern between some developers. In this article, we will deepen the possible disadvantages of the introduction of these operational codes and what long -term health means of the Ethereum ecosystem.
op_checktemplify (opct)
One of the most controversial operational codes is OPCT, which allows you to check a single transaction several times from several nodes. While this feature can improve scalability and reduce the load on the net, enable opct in a future soft bifurcation could lead to problems with compatibility and safety.
* Incompatibility:
OPT would require updates for customers and existing applications based on EIP-1559 (the current implementation of the Ethereum protocol). This could cause generalized interruptions and request an expensive rewriting.
* Safety risks: If opct is not implemented correctly, it could create vulnerability for the harmful actors to be exploited. For example, an attacker could use opct to compromise a single transaction that verifies it several times, which potentially leads to significant losses or even robbery.
* Overhead of Performance: The introduction of new verification mechanisms can lead to greater congestion of the network and the processing times of the slower blocks.
SIGHASH_AYPREVOT (SP)
Another operating code that has been criticized for its possible inconvenience is SP, which allows you to check a single transaction several times by several nodes without the need for EIP-1559. While this feature can improve performance and reduce the load on the network, allowing SP in a future soft bifurcation could lead to problems with compatibility and safety.
* Incompatibility: similar to OPCT, SPE would require updates for existing customers and applications based on EIP-1559. This could cause generalized interruptions and request an expensive rewriting.
* Safety risks: if SP is not implemented correctly, it could create vulnerability for the harmful actors to be exploited. For example, an attacker could use SP to compromise a single transaction by checking it several times, which potentially leads to significant losses or even theft.
* Overhead of Performance: The introduction of new verification mechanisms can lead to greater congestion of the network and the processing times of the slower blocks.
op_cat (opt)
Op_cat is another operating code that has been criticized for its possible inconveniences. This operating code allows you to check a single transaction several times from several nodes, without the need for EIP-1559. While this feature can improve scalability and reduce the load on the net, enable Op_cat in a slight soft bifurcation could lead to problems with compatibility and safety.
* Incompatibility: As opct and SP, op_cat would require updates for customers and existing applications based on EIP-1559. This could cause generalized interruptions and request an expensive rewriting.
* Safety risks: If Olect is not implemented correctly, it could create vulnerability for the harmful actors to be exploited. For example, an attacked user could use Olect to compromise a single transaction that verifies it several times, which potentially leads to significant losses or even robbery.
* Overhead of Performance: The introduction of new verification mechanisms can lead to greater congestion of the network and the processing times of the slower blocks.
Conclusion
Enable the potentially subopim or unused operating codes in a future soft bifurcation could lead to significant problems for the Ethereum ecosystem. While these characteristics can improve scalability and reduce the load on the network, they also introduce potential risks for safety and compatibility problems.