Written by: 0XNATALIE
At the Devcon conference, Ethereum Foundation core member Justin Drake proposed a comprehensive restructuring of Ethereum's consensus layer, calling it Beam Chain. By redesigning the consensus layer, it aims to alleviate the MEV problem, enhance scalability and security, and apply ZK technology for performance improvement. Beam Chain primarily focuses on changes to the consensus layer and does not involve creating new tokens or changing the existing blockchain architecture.
Ethereum's existing consensus layer (Beacon Chain) has a history of five years, and while it performs well in terms of security, technical debt has been accumulating over time. Moreover, as the Ethereum community delves deeper into MEV research and the rapid advancements in ZK technology, the existing consensus layer's adaptability to emerging technologies is insufficient. The Beam Chain restructuring plan aims to clear technical burdens, allowing Ethereum to be more flexible and adaptable in the future.
Technical Highlights
From a technical perspective, Beam Chain has two features: achieving Snarkification through ZKVM and using hash-based aggregate signatures.
The consensus layer is primarily responsible for how all nodes in the network reach consensus on the state of the chain (e.g., transaction order, account balances, etc.). In Ethereum, the tasks of the consensus layer include validating blocks, verifying signatures, handling forks, and maintaining and updating account states. The key operation of the consensus layer is state transition, i.e., moving from one block's state (e.g., account balance after transactions) to the next block's state. These operations often involve a lot of computation, and Snarkification is a technical means to convert the computation process into zero-knowledge proofs.
Beam Chain utilizes ZKVM to achieve Snarkification of the consensus layer, converting the state transition function into zero-knowledge proofs. ZKVM is responsible for offloading the computation process, thereby reducing the burden of on-chain computation. Each node can confirm whether the state is correct by verifying the zero-knowledge proof without needing to recompute. Additionally, Beam Chain allows validators to choose suitable ZKVMs without enforcing specific ZKVMs into the on-chain protocol.
At the same time, with the development of quantum computing, traditional cryptographic technologies (such as elliptic curve encryption) may face the risk of being cracked. This means that the security of current blockchain systems (such as private keys and signature verification) could be compromised once quantum computers emerge. To address this threat, Beam Chain introduces a hash-based aggregate signature scheme. Hash functions possess post-quantum security, capable of resisting attacks from quantum computing. This scheme not only improves the efficiency of signature aggregation but also provides higher security assurances for the future.
Furthermore, Beam Chain adopts PBS, introducing inclusion lists and execution auctions to reduce the negative impacts of MEV. It also plans to lower the minimum staking requirement for validators from 32 ETH to 1 ETH to further enhance decentralization. The entire transition of Beam Chain will be carried out in phases, gradually replacing the functions of the Beacon Chain, which is expected to take five years.
Community Views
Concerns about development time: The community generally expresses concerns about Beam Chain's 5-year development cycle, and some members question whether the goal of Beam Chain is to gradually bring Ethereum closer to Solana's features.
Delphi Ventures founding partner José Maria Macedo expressed disappointment with Beam Chain. He believes that the core improvements of Beam Chain are merely a restructuring of the codebase, including a 4-second block time and 'quantum-resistant' capabilities, but these changes are expected to be realized only by 2029-2030. Such improvements are insufficient for Ethereum L1 to maintain its competitive advantage in the blockchain race and cannot shape a long-term competitiveness narrative for Ethereum.
Helius CEO Mert also expressed concerns about the development timeline of Beam Chain. If Beam Chain indeed requires until 2029 to be released, Ethereum may struggle to maintain competitiveness in the rapidly evolving blockchain landscape.
EthStorage co-founder Qi Zhou believes that the timeline for Beam Chain to be completed by 2030 is too long. He suggests focusing on development using a single programming language (such as Rust or Go) to speed up the implementation. Ethereum can refer to Cosmos's 're-genesis' model (re-generating the blockchain genesis block, retaining the core state data of users and contracts, and removing redundant historical data and outdated code from the system) to address technical burdens and legacy issues through a thorough reset.
Hydrogen Labs co-founder Meir is concerned that the timeline for Beam Chain is too long and may not meet Ethereum's scalability needs as a fully functional blockchain. If Ethereum's goal is to be an efficient blockchain platform rather than merely a DA, it needs faster and more radical scalability improvements rather than gradual optimizations over the next five years.
Abstract developer cygaar explains why the 5-year timeline for Beam Chain is necessary. He points out that Ethereum is not an ordinary small blockchain; it is the second-largest blockchain in the world, with $60 billion in TVL, $400 billion in underlying asset value, and thousands of applications dependent on it. Implementing such large-scale changes on a distributed, real-time Ethereum network is extremely difficult and involves significant risks, thus requiring a long preparation period and rigorous testing. Any mistakes could lead to severe losses for users.
Ethereum client Prysm maintainer terence addresses concerns about the lengthy implementation time for Beam Chain, stating that Beam Chain is Ethereum's 'ultimate goal.' During this period, Ethereum will continue to improve through hard forks. Some proposals in Beam Chain help enhance Ethereum's decentralization and censorship resistance. Meanwhile, before implementation, Ethereum will continually improve data availability, censorship resistance, EVM performance, etc., to meet evolving demands.
Flashbots strategy lead Hasu believes that the Beam Chain proposal should not be overly hyped, as it is a long-term project that will take at least 5 years to realize, and most improvements have already been outlined in the technical roadmap. The real innovation lies in bundling these improvements for testing and future comprehensive on-chain replacement, which should be the highlight of accelerating the process. However, many community members mistakenly view this proposal as an exciting 'Ethereum 3.0' release, even hoping to emulate some features of Solana, leading to unmet expectations.
MetaLeX founder gabrielShapir0 believes that Ethereum's core values lie in its decentralization and autonomy, and Beam Chain will significantly enhance these core features. Many people hope that Ethereum can provide different products and services or cater to more popular trends and narratives, but that is not Ethereum's positioning; rather, it is Solana's direction.
Technical Challenges
Ethereum Foundation core member Péter believes that the Beam Chain proposal has too many changes packed together, which poses potential problems from both technical and governance perspectives. Technically, too many combined changes increase the likelihood of errors. From a governance perspective, packing multiple changes may lead to details being overlooked and increase the risk of disputes. He suggests first handling low-difficulty improvement tasks on the Beacon Chain, and then implementing more complex changes in phases to allow the system to gradually adapt and avoid comprehensive reforms at once.
Ethereum researcher mteam states that while the Beam Chain proposal is announced as a new idea, it is essentially consolidating many old ideas from the past. He supports the proposal but is also concerned that this upgrade may interfere with research on the execution layer. The execution layer and consensus layer are two independent research directions that should be improved in parallel, avoiding mutual interference.
SMG Research Director Max Resnick states that Ethereum needs a more grand vision and should not be constrained by a phased incremental improvement every five years. He calls for a return to Ethereum's original intention, making it a global computing platform that helps developers solve the most complex coordination problems. He proposed goals that Ethereum should achieve in the next five years, including: achieving a 1-second block time; single-slot finality for easier cross-chain interoperability; significantly increasing throughput (>1000 TPS); and multiple parallel proposers to achieve real-time censorship resistance.