You are reading an excerpt from our free but shortened abridged report! While still packed with incredible research and data, for just $40/month you can upgrade to our FULL library of 60+ reports (including this one) and complete industry-leading analysis on the top crypto assets. 

Becoming a Premium member means enjoying all the perks of a Basic membership PLUS:

• Full-length CORE Reports: More technical, in-depth research, actionable insights, and potential market alpha for serious crypto users
• Early access to future CORE ratings: Being early is sometimes just as important as being right!
• Premium Member CORE+ Reports: Coverage on the top issues pertaining to crypto users like bridge security, layer two solutions, DeFi plays, and more
• CORE report Audio playback: Don’t want to read? No problem! Listen on the go.

Intro

Users who wish to navigate across the likes of Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, and other blockchains will typically find they need many different wallet addresses, compatible tools, assets, and more just to utilize different apps across blockchains. While some universal wallets like MetaMask support multiple networks, they generally do not cover them all, nor do they easily show the wallet owner what assets they have where and what applications they may be connected to or using. This makes the UX complicated, costly, and, quite frankly, inappropriately inefficient in garnering any form of mass adoption on-chain.

Just moving value across chains requires many different transactions and fees, resulting in a clunky and overpriced process. For users who wish to utilize different assets, mint NFTs, or participate in on-chain DeFi services, every single action item requires a transaction and corresponding fees to cover gas. Thus, unfortunately, the costs associated with truly navigating the multichain space result in siloed users (and liquidity) as it becomes economically inefficient to participate outside of the chain someone was onboarded onto.

Not to mention, wallet management alone is enough to deter a significant number of users from truly adopting multichain habits. Each externally owned wallet requires its own public key (an identifiable address string starting with “0x”) and corresponding private keys and recovery codes. Users who wish to traverse incompatible chains (like Ethereum and Solana) will be forced to manage multiple sets of keys and recovery codes.

The concept of blockchain modularity has gained traction as a potential solution to economic inefficiencies, serving as an alternative to monolithic networks. Modularity proposes that the primary functions of blockchains—execution, settlement, data availability, and consensus—be divided into separate layers or networks. However, modularity creates its own major issue: liquidity fragmentation. While fragmented liquidity is already a problem in the multichain space, it is further exacerbated when introduced into monolithic systems like Ethereum.

Source

With Ethereum’s ever-growing L2 space, an increasing amount of capital that originated on Ethereum is now segmented across multiple different networks, including Aribtrum, Optimism, and Base. In a modular model, the more chains and networks that are introduced, the worse the liquidity fragmentation becomes. This also affects the UX as it means that pools, assets, and on-chain activities will experience higher volatility and more unpredictability in systems due to lower liquidity.

Improving the UX of a multichain crypto economy boils down to solving two main challenges:

1. Eliminating liquidity fragmentation wherever possible
2. Reducing the costs and complexity associated with fragmented user bases

Chain Abstraction

Chain abstraction is an innovative approach designed to streamline the increasingly fragmented modular landscape of Web3. By abstracting the complexities of blockchain technology, chain abstraction allows for seamless interaction with different blockchains, eliminating the need for users to distinguish between them. This approach can significantly enhance user experience by simplifying engagement with various blockchains and reducing the complexity of managing multiple accounts and assets. 

This design pattern minimizes the necessity for users to understand the specifics of any particular underlying blockchain, focusing instead on completing user tasks in the most optimal manner, regardless of the involved chains. This reduces the entry barrier for average users, making blockchain technology more accessible.

Overall, there are three core attributes associated with chain abstraction:

1. Chain Interaction
2. Unified User Interface
3. Cost Reduction

Chain abstraction allows dApps to execute their logic across multiple blockchains without needing users to switch networks, change wallets, or execute multiple transactions. Typically, users would have to manually switch the network they were using (in the case of universal wallets like MetaMask) to using a different chain or have to switch wallets entirely (if their main wallet was incompatible). This process is cumbersome and can lead to errors, creating barriers to user adoption. With chain abstraction, the underlying complexities of network interactions are hidden from the user. The system handles cross-chain communication seamlessly, allowing users to execute operations across any blockchain as if they were interacting with a single network. This not only simplifies the user experience but also enhances the efficiency and fluidity of dApp interactions, making blockchain technology more accessible and user-friendly.

This directly simplifies the user interface (UI) as well, in that it allows users to interact with their chosen dApps using any supported token from any blockchain with a single landing environment. There would no longer be a need to change interfaces every time the network needed to be changed. 

Traditionally, users must navigate different interfaces and platforms to interact with various blockchain networks, which can be confusing and time-consuming. A unified interface consolidates these interactions into one cohesive platform, enabling users to perform all necessary functions without switching contexts. This streamlines the user experience, making it more intuitive and efficient. By eliminating the need to navigate away to perform essential functions, a unified interface reduces the cognitive load on users, encouraging broader adoption and engagement with blockchain applications.

These simplifications ultimately result in a reduction in gas and transaction costs, making the management of liquidity on the user's part far more efficient. In the current blockchain ecosystem, users must acquire and spend native tokens of each blockchain network to pay transaction fees, which adds an extra layer of complexity and inconvenience. With chain abstraction, these chain-specific details are managed behind the scenes, allowing users to conduct transactions without worrying about acquiring the correct gas tokens for each network. This simplification reduces the friction associated with blockchain transactions, making it easier for users to engage with dApps and perform transactions seamlessly across different blockchains.

Components of Chain Abstraction

Account Abstraction

Account Abstraction (AA) is a transformative approach in blockchain technology, particularly within the Ethereum network, that integrates Externally Owned Accounts (EOAs) with smart contracts into a unified account type. This integration enhances flexibility and customizability in transaction validation by allowing programmable validity conditions through smart contracts. This framework supports specific applications like automatic payments while broadening overall transaction efficiency across Ethereum and other chains. Chain abstraction builds on this concept to create a simpler and more powerful user experience for on-chain users.

Source

Today's wallets face several limitations, including security vulnerabilities and limited functionality, unless used in conjunction with other smart contracts. AA reimagines this scenario by transforming EOAs into smart contract wallets (SCWs). Unlike EOAs, which cannot initiate transactions on their own and require an EOA's prompt, SCWs merge the capabilities of both, empowering them to initiate transactions and execute complex, arbitrary logic inherent to smart contracts. This transformation unlocks a plethora of use cases, significantly enhancing user experience in the context of chain abstraction. 

By converting an EOA into an SCW, the execution and signing of transactions are effectively separated. This means users do not need to execute transactions directly; instead, sophisticated actors, known as executors, can perform these tasks on their behalf. Executors handling transactions on behalf of users eliminate the need for direct interaction with smart contracts while maintaining user custody of funds. This dynamic allows for convenient blockchain application usage through interfaces like Telegram bots.

Intents

In the context of blockchain, an “intent” refers to a user's desired end state, such as acquiring a specific number of tokens, without detailing the precise mechanism to achieve this goal. This differs significantly from traditional transactions, which require explicit instructions on how to execute the action. For instance, a transaction might dictate "perform action A, then B, paying exactly C to receive X," whereas an intent simply states, "I want X and am willing to pay up to C." This abstract approach allows for more flexibility and efficiency in achieving user goals.

Intent-based systems leverage the concept of separating the "what" from the "how." Users specify their desired outcomes, and a service provider, known as a solver, handles the complexity of determining the most efficient way to fulfill the request. This can involve using various decentralized exchanges (DEXs), splitting transactions into smaller parts, or any other method to achieve the user's goal in the best possible terms. The solver's role is crucial as it ensures that the user’s intent is executed optimally, often resulting in better prices and reduced slippage compared to traditional transaction methods.

Solvers are sophisticated actors who execute transactions on behalf of users in the most optimal manner. When a user submits an intent, it is routed to an encrypted private mempool where solvers compete to fill the intent. Solvers use their own balance sheets, private order flow, or on-chain liquidity venues like Uniswap and Curve to fulfill these intents. This competition among solvers drives their margins to zero, ensuring users get the best execution possible. This system benefits users by abstracting away the complexities of blockchain interactions and providing a seamless experience.

Achieving Chain Abstraction Through Intents

In an account-abstracted world, the delineation between signers and executors allows users to click a button to sign a transaction, outsourcing all on-chain needs to sophisticated actors. These actors bear the risks and manage interactions across various applications on different blockchains. By pricing their services according to the risks and complexities involved, solvers ensure that users do not need to worry about the intricacies of blockchain transactions, including gas fees and execution risks. This significantly simplifies the user experience and aligns with the goals of chain abstraction.

An example of intent-based architecture is found in a project called deBridge, with its chosen model shown below:

Chain Abstraction and ZK Technology

Zero-knowledge (ZK) technology is a revolutionary cryptographic method that enhances privacy, security, and efficiency in blockchain networks. By allowing one party (the prover) to prove to another party (the verifier) that a statement is true without revealing any specific information about the statement itself, ZK technology addresses several core issues in blockchain ecosystems, such as data privacy and resource optimization.

There are three primary rules when it comes to ZK technology:

1. If the statement is true, the honest verifier will be convinced by the honest prover.
2. If the statement is false, no cheating prover can convince the honest verifier that it is true, except with some small probability.
3. The verifier learns nothing other than the fact that the statement is true. The actual data or the specifics of the statement remain hidden.

ZK Technology in the Context of Chain Abstraction

As stated previously, chain abstraction is designed to simplify user interactions across multiple blockchain networks, effectively hiding the underlying complexities of blockchain-specific operations from the end user. Here, ZK technology plays a crucial role by enabling secure and private validations of transactions across different chains.

Source: Particle Network

By using ZKPs, chain abstraction frameworks can verify transactions across different blockchains without needing to expose the details of the transactions. This allows for a more seamless and secure interaction between disparate blockchain networks, enhancing user experience and security. 

ZKPs also reduce the computational load on the main chain by allowing off-chain computation of transaction validations. Only a proof of the transaction’s validity is submitted to the blockchain, significantly reducing the data and processing load. This is especially beneficial in chain abstraction, where interactions could span multiple blockchains and potentially overwhelm network traffic and storage.

Finally, in a chain abstraction environment, where a user might interact with multiple blockchains, maintaining privacy across these platforms is crucial. ZKPs ensure that user transactions remain confidential, with no details of the user's activities being exposed across the chains.

Consider a dApp that facilitates cross-chain asset swaps. With ZK technology, the application can verify that the assets are locked in a contract on one chain before releasing equivalent assets on another chain without revealing any details of the underlying assets or user identities. This not only simplifies the user's interaction but also ensures that all transactions are secure and private.

Overall, the integration of ZK technology within chain abstraction frameworks offers significant advantages in terms of security, privacy, efficiency, and user experience. As blockchain technology evolves, the synergy between sophisticated cryptographic techniques like ZKPs and chain abstraction models will likely play a pivotal role in the widespread adoption and functionality of decentralized systems.