The article is provided by a third party and does not represent the views of Wu Shuo.

Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin expressed concerns about the security of cross-chain bridges in a blog post in 2022, pointing out that cross-chain bridges could become a weak link in the blockchain ecosystem.

Cross-chain bridge security was once the sword of Damocles hanging over the blockchain industry. Although interoperability between different chains can bring convenience like a "highway", it may also introduce new security risks.

Vitalik's view is more like a warning than a prophecy. Data shows that in the past year alone, the loss of funds due to security vulnerabilities in cross-chain bridges has exceeded $2 billion. Although there are currently a variety of cross-chain bridging solutions, they have played an important role in achieving the flow of assets and information between chains. However, these traditional solutions still have some challenges in terms of security, efficiency and scalability.

As the DeFi infrastructure continues to evolve, there are always innovators trying to change the direction of the tide. For example, deBrige, who has gradually stepped from a hackathon winner to one of the largest bridges on Solana, is gradually coming into the public eye.

Re-examining the current status of cross-chain technology

Currently, cross-chain bridges are mainly divided into two categories: bridges that rely on liquidity pools and cross-chain protocols based on messaging. Traditional cross-chain solutions, such as LayerZero and its official bridge Stargate, usually adopt a liquidity pool model, which requires a certain amount of assets to be locked in the protocol. This method enables cross-chain transfer of assets, but may face some challenges in terms of capital efficiency and security.

The existence of liquidity pools makes cross-chain bridges a target for hackers. In addition, maintaining liquidity pools requires continuous incentives, otherwise funds may flow to other places with higher returns. This model faces sustainability challenges in long-term operations.

deBridge's innovative model

To address the above issues, deBridge proposed a zero total locked value (TVL) model, which enables cross-chain transactions without locking up a large amount of assets through the "on-demand liquidity" approach.

In the design of deBridge, there are two types of participants:

Market Makers: Users and protocols that wish to conduct cross-chain transactions.

Order Taker: Liquidity provider who is willing to complete cross-chain orders.

This mechanism is similar to cross-chain limit order transactions. Market makers issue cross-chain transaction intentions, and order takers selectively complete orders based on their own liquidity conditions. The advantages of this method are:

Improved capital efficiency: Liquidity is controlled directly by owners, without being locked in a shared liquidity pool.

Improved security: There is no centralized liquidity pool, which reduces the risk of being attacked.

Speed ​​up transactions: Through asynchronous value transfer, instant settlement of cross-chain transactions is achieved.

The "Zero TVL Model" proposed by deBridge aims to eliminate the reliance on liquidity pools and achieve higher capital efficiency and security by not locking any assets in the protocol. In this model, the protocol itself does not hold the user's assets, avoiding the risk of becoming a target of attack.

"On-demand liquidity" is the key mechanism for deBridge to achieve the zero TVL model. Simply put, it connects market makers who want to conduct cross-chain transactions and order takers who are capable of completing these transactions through a decentralized market. In this mechanism, when a market maker issues a cross-chain transaction request, the order taker can selectively complete the order based on its own liquidity status. Because transactions are based on order matching rather than relying on pre-locked liquidity pools, there is no need to lock a large amount of assets in the protocol.

Market performance supported by data

According to data provided by deBridge, they have accumulated $12 million in transaction fees so far without any liquidity incentive activities. This shows that they have achieved stable income without locking up a large amount of funds.

In terms of token valuation, LayerZero's token $ZRO has a fully diluted valuation (FDV) of approximately $3.495 billion, and its official bridge Stargate's token $STG has an FDV of approximately $324 million. In comparison, deBridge's upcoming token $DBR has an FDV of $250 million.

In terms of protocol activity and revenue, deBridge has the following performance:

Fee income: According to DefiLlama data, deBridge has earned over $3 million in fees in the past 90 days

Stability of trading volume: deBridge has maintained a stable trading volume over a long period of time, and the change in trading volume is relatively small when the market fluctuates

These data reflect that deBridge's business model has a certain stability and sustainability in terms of revenue and transaction volume.

Comparison of security models

Security is the key to cross-chain technology. Here are some differences between deBridge and LayerZero in terms of security model:

deBridge：

Isolation security model: Risks between different chains are relatively independent. If a problem occurs on a chain, the impact will be limited to that chain.

Validator consensus model: uses a consensus mechanism with 12 validators, which aims to enhance the robustness of the system through delegated staking and penalty mechanisms

Off-chain verification: Validators sign messages off-chain, potentially providing higher throughput and lower costs

LayerZero/Stargate：

Shared security model: The security of each chain is closely related, and problems on one chain may affect other chains

2/2 consensus mechanism: relying on the dual consent of the oracle and the relayer

On-chain verification: requires oracle and relayer proof, which may have an impact on gas fees

These differences reflect the choices made by different cross-chain protocols in security model design, each of which has its own advantages and applicable scenarios.

Interoperability as a Service (IaaS)

deBridge proposed the concept of "Interoperability as a Service (IaaS)" to lower the threshold for new blockchains to access the cross-chain network. Any blockchain ecosystem can access deBridge through smart contract subscriptions to achieve seamless communication with other supported blockchains.

Alex, the founder of deBridge, explained in an interview: "Our goal is to make deBridge truly decentralized, so that any blockchain can access our network without going through cumbersome processes or high fees." This model helps accelerate the interconnection of the blockchain ecosystem and promote the coordinated development of the entire industry. Alex emphasized that their goal is to build a "liquidity internet" for DeFi, allowing assets and information to flow freely like Internet data.

deBridge's future ecological expansion

Recently launched deBridge Hooks, a feature that allows custom logic to be added to cross-chain transactions. With Hooks, developers can add specific business logic to cross-chain operations to achieve more complex cross-chain application scenarios.

Looking forward to the future development of the ecosystem, deBridge has also formulated a plan direction: first, support more blockchain networks, plan to integrate more blockchains, such as Tron, etc., expand the scope of cross-chain interoperability, and promote the interconnection of more ecosystems; secondly, launch the P2P function on (DLN), allowing more customized transactions; in addition, develop gas-free transaction functions, strive to reduce users' transaction costs, improve user experience, and make cross-chain transactions more convenient and efficient; at the same time, expand custody services, support the transfer of assets between different chains through the dePort custody solution, create derivatives, and plan to enable custody for Bitcoin (BTC) first, allowing native BTC transactions on other chains.

Economic Model DBR Token Issuance and Community Participation

According to official news, deBridge's governance token DBR has begun to circulate and airdropped to 491,286 early users and loyal community members of DeFi. On October 15, the token DBR ended in Jupiter's LFG event, with the price of DBR being $0.025 per coin. deBridge will use 200 million DBR (2% of the total supply) for LFG, and 50% of the tokens obtained by participants will be issued at TGE and the remaining 50% will be issued six months later. The maximum supply of DBR is 10 billion, and the initial circulating supply is 1.8 billion (18% of the total supply), which is consistent with other token issuances on Solana (such as Pyth's 15% and Wormhole's 18%). It is worth noting that the initial valuation of DBR is relatively low, with a fully diluted valuation (FDV) of US$250 million. It will be listed on more than 10 CEXs on October 17, such as Bybit, Kraken, Kucoin, Crypto.com, HTX, Bitget, Gate.io, BingX, Coinone, Backpack, etc. Its performance is worth further observation.

Conclusion

The future of cross-chain technology is full of infinite possibilities, but also comes with many challenges. As Vitalik Buterin pointed out, the security of cross-chain bridges is a key issue that needs to be solved in the blockchain ecosystem. deBridge's exploration has injected new vitality and thinking into this field.

Through its unique “zero total locked value” model and “on-demand liquidity” mechanism, deBridge’s practice has proven that cross-chain interoperability does not have to come at the expense of security, and that capital efficiency and system robustness may go hand in hand.