# Gasper resources As the title suggests, what follows are various resources I found useful in researching Ethereum's consensus design. I hope that this aggregation of information saves you time. A great starter is [Appreciating GASPER ](https://twitter.com/sreeramkannan/status/1530474715990478848?s=20&t=bzUSSHdit9eMJDqarhsV1w)by [Sreeram Kannan](https://twitter.com/sreeramkannan) ## Research * [ETH2 Book](https://eth2book.info/altair/contents) * [LMD-GHOST](https://github.com/protolambda/lmd-ghost) * [Ethereum Reorgs After The Merge (Vitalik + Georgios)](https://www.paradigm.xyz/2021/07/ethereum-reorgs-after-the-merge) * [Proposer Boost](https://ethresear.ch/t/change-fork-choice-rule-to-mitigate-balancing-and-reorging-attacks/11127) * [Path towards single slot finality (Vitalik 2022)](https://notes.ethereum.org/@vbuterin/single_slot_finality) * [View Merge](https://ethresear.ch/t/view-merge-as-a-replacement-for-proposer-boost/13739) * [Goldfish: A Provably Secure Replacement for LMD GHOST in PoS Ethereum](https://www.paradigm.xyz/2022/09/goldfish) * [Beacon Chain 7 Block Reorg](https://barnabe.substack.com/p/pos-ethereum-reorg) * [Proposal for Mitigation Against Balancing Attacks](https://notes.ethereum.org/@vbuterin/lmd_ghost_mitigation) * [Casper FFG with Backoff](https://notes.ethereum.org/@vbuterin/casper_ffg_with_backoff) ## Papers * [Combining Ghost and Casper](https://arxiv.org/pdf/2003.03052.pdf) * [Capser FFG Paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.09437) * [Minimal CBC Casper](https://github.com/cbc-casper/cbc-casper-paper/blob/master/cbc-casper-paper-draft.pdf) * [No More Attacks in POS Ethereum Paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2209.03255) ## Specifications * [Ethereum Consensus ](https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs) * [Proposer Boost ](https://github.com/ethereum/consensus-specs/pull/2730) ## Podcasts & Videos * [The Why and How of PoS Ethereum's Consensus Problem](https://youtu.be/2nMS-TK_tMw) * [Whiteboard series with Near: Justin Drake](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S262StTwkmo&t=813s) * [Casper FFG (Karl Flourish 2018)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uQ3IqLDf-oo) * [Quick Explainer (Danny Ryan 2020)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P84r0PGGfIg) * [Information Theory & Blockchain | Zk Podcast](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yPe8rqux5js) * [Security models & Ethereum PoS | Logan Jastremski Podcast ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DikrWN39Hts) ## Visuals #### **Nested Ledger** (h/t [Joachim Neu](https://youtu.be/2nMS-TK_tMw)) ![](https://i.imgur.com/R9TOBNU.png) #### **Epochs - Justified & Finalized Checkpoints** (h/t [Justin Drake](https://youtu.be/S262StTwkmo?t=813)) ![](https://i.imgur.com/bZH96Mm.jpg) #### **Fork Choice Rule & Finality Gadget** (h/t [Buterin & Griffith](https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.09437)) ![](https://i.imgur.com/jLKjszE.png) ###### **proposer LMD score boosting not shown*
Last changed by  
 
apriori
884

Read more

Coordination is Power : cross-domain MEV & decentralized sequencing for rollups

This note is a work in progress and should not be mistaken for a finished project

1/2/2024
Mapping the Labryinth

In this article we will briefly reveiw the general types of application deployments to choose from and different types of applications that are interesting to build. Then we will propose a debate game application called the referee, the heart of the article. Finally, we conclude with a succinct analysis. General Types of application deployments App-chain- You have an application or an idea for a suite of applications and would like to guarantee sovereignty or a notion of it for your community who can hard-fork via social consensus should conflict arise. The Cosmos SDK is battletested and comes with IBC & Tendermint, some of the most battletested protocols in crypto. This could also be a rational L3 deployment and benefit from Ethereum’s liquidity. Smart Contracts - SC dapps inherent the security and limitations of the chain you deploy on. As an SC dapp you can focus on a specific PMF for your product. There are also robust security frameworks for auditing and formal verification for more mature languages like Solidity. Cross-chain communication amongst different instances of your dapp fragments liquidity and introduces new trust assumptions. Universal L1 - High DA throughput for specific needs like CLOB, on-chain gaming, Social Media, et al. The death spiral risk is acute early on but persists through the chain’s lifetime. Unknown attack vectors. Difficulty boot-strapping a community. Difficult to bootstrap inital token liquidity without venture funding. Rollups - Rollups move computation (and state storage) off-chain, but keep some data per transaction on-chain. To date, much of the work here focuses on building EVM equivalent rollups though formidable alternatives exist. A key distinction of enshrined rollups aside from on chain da and proof verification is the censorship resistance mechanism. Users have the ability to exit enshrined rollups to L1 via forced inclusion txs, escape hatches, or proposing blocks. Soveriegn rollups rely on social consensus or some form of governance to upgrade via a hard-fork. Both types of rollups can use fraud or validity proofs to guarentee/enforce the validity of the rollup, that its execution is compliant with the state transition function, $\sigma'$ $=$ $\gamma$$($ $\sigma$$,$ $T$$)$where $\sigma'$ is the new state $\gamma$ is the state transition function $\sigma$ is the previous state $T$ is a transaction

4/28/2023
High Latency Governance

Ethereum governance is a delicate process that relies on rough social consensus of the community, core developers and EF researchers. Improvement proposals (EIPs) are the primary mechanism for proposing new features and communicating these proposed features with the Ethereum Community. EIP standardization process The EIP standardization process is a mechanism for proposing new features, for collecting community technical input on an issue, and for documenting the design decisions that have gone into Ethereum. ~EIP-5069 An EIP can be crafted following the EIP format (EIP-1). There are three types of EIPs, A Standard Track (core, networking, Interface & ERC), a Meta-EIP (process changes), and Informational EIPs (provides information or general guidelines). An EIP must meet certain minimum criteria. It must be a clear and complete description of the proposed enhancement. The enhancement must represent a net improvement. The proposed implementation, if applicable, must be solid and must not complicate the protocol unduly. ~ EIP-1 EIP Life-cycle

3/28/2023
Notes on Arbitrum: reviewing the sequencer

Arbitrum is a classic rollup on Etheruem that uses a Sequencer to collect user txs, order them and then submit batches of transactions to L1. Today, the Sequencers for Nitro and Nova operate as centralized entities maintained by the Arbitrum foundation. Despite this centralization, Arbitrum maintains a trust-minimized security model and censorship resistance. In the common case, the Arbitrum Sequencer receives user transactions and orders them in a sequence with a FCFS (first-come, first-serve) algorithm serving as an input to the execution stage of Arbitrum. Upon receiving the transaction the Sequencer will execute it and deliver the user a receipt or soft-confirmation. Shortly thereafter the Sequencer will collect enough transactions into a batch and post them to L1 by calling the Inbox method addSequencerL2Batch. Only the Sequencer has the authority to call this method. As a result this allows the Sequencer to provide instant soft-confirmations. The transactions have L1 finality once the batch is finalized. In the cases where Sequencer acts malicious, users would need to submit an L2 message via L1 to the delayed inbox. After 24 hours,forceInclusion is called moving the L2 message from the delayed inbox to the core SequencerInbox and is then finalized. Current Drawbacks Latency races Centralized Sequencer

3/21/2023
Read more from apriori
Published on HackMD