Bridges are a road to nowhere for blockchain communications

Everyone knows that blockchain bridges are broken. They are generally recognized as one of the most important risks of trade in Defi, illustrated by the Akbit” RoninAnd Worm Exploits that have stolen hundreds of millions of dollars in the money of investors.

They suffer from multiple failures, but they are still used on a large scale, so that someone who claims blockchain transactions somehow “safe” than traditional finances.

Blockchain bridges, however, have become an essential part of the Defi and Web3 ecosystem because it has been turned into a mix of independent networks. Bitcoin (BTC) has enormous value and safety, Ethereum (ETH) is the home base of the largest selection of Dapps and Solana (SOLAN) is rated for its super -Faste transactions. This makes it necessary to move assets from one chain to another. Defi users who limit themselves to one network miss important opportunities, therefore interoperability is considered essential, even if it is very risky.

But what makes blockchain bridges so vulnerable? Usually it is because they consist of several components, including validators, oracles and preservators, who expose users to numerous attack vectors. These risks have been illustrated many times in the form of smart contract hacks and validator acquisitions. Moreover, even if the bridge itself is safe, hackers can still steal the money from users through tricks such as Border Gateway protocol that hijack or exploit the underlying network. With so many moving parts, it seems unlikely that bridges will someday be made safe.

So how can we remedy this?

We have to leave this idea that bridges are somehow the best solution and instead see blockchain interoperability for what it really is. It is essentially about blockchain communication, or getting these networks to talk to each other, and there is no hard rule that we have to use a bridge.

A promising system Chain signsThey were developed by Hot Labs and almost (near) Protocol teams as a way for accounts to sign transactions on multiple block chains. They use a decentralized calculation network with multiple parties or MPC that is being protected by turning off to facilitate very resilient cross-network communication.

Within an MPC network, several nodes work together to perform complex calculations while retaining complete privacy about their computational outputs. In chain signs, these MPCs are combined with nearly accounts, which are unique of those on other block chains because of their ability to control an unlimited number of subaccounts that can work in the same way as smart contracts. These subaccounts can therefore be used to manage programmable MPC calls and request individual nodes within these networks to sign transactions on third-party block chains.

Because each of the MPC nodes works independently of the others and retains complete privacy, chain signs can spread trust over several actors, so that none of them have access to the full transaction data. When a nearby account requires the MPC network to sign a transaction for another blockchain, it will use a key that is shared by each of the MPC nodes to generate a cryptographic signature of that transaction, without exposing one of the details.

The only thing to do is to protect this cryptographic key, and this can be done with the help of something called ‘trusted implementation environments’. These are secure areas within computer processors that protect code and data against unauthorized access. They do this by insulating the most important operating system and other processes, which guarantees “confidential” transaction processing. We can use T -pieces to protect the main keys for chain signature transactions. When a nearby account asks the MPC network to sign a transaction, the data for that request will be in the tee, which then spits out the digital signature that verifies the transaction. But the cryptographic key never leaves this safe environment. As a result, this private key is never exposed, which eliminates any possibility of unauthorized access.

Chain bridges change the game

We can see the implications of chain signs and how they drastically relieve cross-chain transactions. The level of abstraction they reach makes the actual blockchain network more or less irrelevant for the end user in a number of Dapps. Satoshi protocol is, for example, a Bitcoin L2 -Rollup network that depends on chain signatures to provide native BTC Smart contracts with electricity to facilitate automated lending, with repayments, interest rates and reward distribution. For the user they do not even notice that they constantly send and receive funds from a second network.

There are more examples in the wider Defi-industry, such as RHEA Finance, a cross-chain yield agriculture and crypto-trade protocol that is built on top of the chain abstraction pile to initiate seamless transactions in defi-ecosystems.

In addition to Defi, the payments of gas costs can also be dramatically simplified with chain signs. With hot gas refueling, user costs can pay on the BNB chain using both Near and Tether (USDT) tokens, which eliminates the hassle of acquiring BNB -Tokens.

Chain signs can also be implemented to simplify the use of cross-chain. Allstake has developed a meshed repeated protocol that makes it possible for each blockchain by disconnecting consensus and implementation. Buying NFTs or non-fungal tokens is also dramatically simplified with chain signs. The Multichain, Chain-Abstacted NFT Marketplace Mint has already demonstrated this by enabling NFTs and gifts on the basis of Ton in the vicinity of portfolios, and holding more chains. Everything on top of the same chain abstraction engine.

It is clear chain signs are robust and flexible enough that they can become the fundamental infrastructure that the entire network for end users, including developers, Abstraht, who give rise to a seamless multichain-tuft, where every DAPP is “chain-gala”. They fully eliminate the need for wrapped assets, trusted relayers and intimate knowledge of how block chains function, giving developers a uniform API for building dapps that can communicate with every network. It is the simplest solution that still blocks the interoperability of blockchain.

It’s time to go beyond bridges

The web3 industry remains fixed on blockchain bridges as the ultimate enabler of interoperability of cross-chain, but nobody has been able to stamp the many critical errors in these architectures.

Nowadays there is a lot of attention for so -called “confidential” bridges that eliminate the guard -risk factor by solidifying confidence in code instead of people. This means that users do not have to trust third -party systems, but it does not solve the risk of exploits in the underlying code. The industry must wake up with the fact that, as long as it depends on code to secure transactions, there will always be a level of risk, because even the most solid and heavily controlled implementations can be defective.

That is why chain signs represent more than just a technical upgrade – they are a fundamental shift in how Web3 thinks about interoperability. We have already reached the limits of what bridges can do safely. Chain signs pass this idea to fundamentally re-imagine access to Cross-Chain, not as an asset transfer, but as a safe external performance. And with this change in mindset, we can unlock a future in which identity and intention of chains move, in contrast to the underlying assets.

With chain signs we no longer have to trust people or code. Instead, we can spread trust over multiple nodes and protect this with tee-based key management, to replace some failure points by an Ironclad framework that will only break down if the entire system collapses. And there is never a way that will ever happen.