pull down to refresh

Oh! I’m totally in the dark with this technique. Gonna read up a bit... I remember reading somewhere around here that Spark wasn’t exactly loved by the btc maxis.
It'd be very cool to see a great spark explainer on SN.
38 sats \ 5 replies \ @ek 11h
I remember reading somewhere around here that Spark wasn’t exactly loved by the btc maxis.
Probably because of this:
Trust Model
Spark operates under a “moment-in-time” trust model, meaning that trust is only required at the time of a transaction. As long as at least one (or a configurable threshold) of the Spark operators behaves honestly during a transfer, the system ensures perfect forward security. Even if operators are later compromised or act maliciously, they cannot retroactively compromise past transactions or take money from users.
This security is achieved through a fundamental action required of SOs: forgetting the operator key after a transfer. If an operator follows this protocol, the transferred funds are secure, even against future coercion or hacking. Spark strengthens this model by using multiple operators, ensuring that as long as one (or the required threshold) deletes their key, users remain secure and have perfect forward security. This approach contrasts with most other Layer 2 solutions, where operators retain the ability to compromise user funds until they exit the system. The only exception is Lightning, which requires no trusted entities at all.
reply
💯
The only exception is Lightning, which requires no trusted entities at all.
reply
55 sats \ 3 replies \ @ek 11h
requires no trusted entities at all.
This should also be the definition of Layer 2 imo. if you need to trust somebody, it's not a Layer 2. So by definition, Lightning is the only Layer 2.
But other "Layer 2 solutions" probably don't like that definition, so they try to make it mean something else. But I don't know what their definition is. Anything is Layer 2 as long as it's not Layer 1?
reply
44 sats \ 1 reply \ @Scoresby 10h
Would you say that there is a little bit more trust involved with lightning is than there is for onchain?
You have to trust your channel partner a little bit. (if they force close on you and you aren't paying attention, or you can't get to the chain for some reason...)
reply
17 sats \ 0 replies \ @ek 9h
If you follow the protocol correctly, I wouldn't say you need to trust your channel partner. This condition means to me it's just not as simple as onchain to not involve trust. But trust is not necessary.
reply
My definition of layer 2 doesn’t mean you don’t trust anyone. But I gotta admit, I know that I know nothing!
reply