The development team behind newly launched Ethereum Layer-2 solution Blast has released a statement in rebuttal to negative claims about the protocol’s security and operations. These developments come amidst the high level of attention currently surrounding the L2, with a reported Total Value Locked of $443 million gained within four days of operation.
Blast Not An L2 Solution, Users Assets At Risk — Polygon Developer
In a series of posts on X on November 23, Jarrod Watts, a developer relations engineer at Polygon, shared his concerns about several aspects of Blasts operation, highlighting the protocol’s proposed aim as well as user asset safety and accessibility.
Launched on November 21, Blasts claims to be a layer-2 solution that offers users native yields on ETH and stablecoin deposits. In contrast to most blockchains with an immutable smart contract, Watts stated that this Ethereum-based L2 operates an upgradable security contract managed by a ⅗ multi-sig authorization model.
While upgradable contracts may be common with L2 solutions, they are a usually temporary arrangement as they allow developers to fix bugs in the early days of a protocol’s operation.
In the case of Blast, Watts highlights that this is the L2’s permanent security model, meaning if a malicious third party gains majority control 3 out 5 of the contract keys, they could implement changes that could threaten the safety of users’ assets.
Furthermore, the Polygon engineer also believes that Blast does not qualify as an L2 solution, stating the protocol possesses no testnet, transactions, bridge, roll-up as well as any proof of data communication with Ethereum. Jared Watts notes that Blast only offers yields on users’ deposits, both of which are currently inaccessible to investors as the platform has no withdrawal feature as of now.
Blast Responds
In a separate post on X, Blast responded to these concerns raised about the users’ assets security on its platform. Firstly, the development team, still maintaining that Blast remains L2, praised the upgradable security model as being superior to an immutable security contract in terms of complex operations.
Blast noted that one can never be confident that a smart contract is totally bug-free. Thus, the development of bugs in immutable smart contracts can be considered lethal for blockchain networks.
In addition, the development team assured users of the strength of the multi-sig model, which provides access to the upgradeable security contract. They stated that, as with the common practice of platforms that use a multi-sig model, all five keys are kept in cold storage, which is managed by separated individuals in different geographic locations.
