ETM2026-08-12_008
Encrypt The Mempool #008
2026-08-12 3 decisions 503 transcript lines
Transcript
- EF Zoom Bot
Hiccup from pushing back a week, will fix on the backend. Youre good to go 🙂
- Boma
Reacted to "Hiccup from pushing back a week, will fix on the backend. Youre good to go 🙂" with ❤️
- Benedikt Wagner
yes
- Benedikt Wagner
When you say DKG, which secret key - public key structure are you thinking about? Because the DKG is specific to that
- Benedikt Wagner
Need to leave, sorry :) Thanks guys!
Call summary
Targets
- •Encrypt The Mempool #9 — August 19, 2026 (without Justin; or skipped to #9 in 3 weeks) - 00:53:02
Decisions
- •No decision yet on classical vs. post-quantum path; question escalated to client teams as primary gate - 00:29:26
Highlights
- Dkg And Committee Design:
- ·Shutter uses Boneh-Franklin IBE (threshold IBE, no batching); keepers prefix identity with sender address for CCA security - 00:08:11
- ·DKG scheme and threshold encryption scheme must be co-designed — cannot isolate or swap independently - 00:09:34
- ·Jannik: validator-sampled committees are easily bribed (purely rational economically); external committees with social reputation are viable outside the core protocol but not enshrined - 00:36:29
- ·Two distinct failure modes: (1) selling/leaking keys early (front-running, hard to detect); (2) withholding keys (optionality, detectable via PTC in Lucid design) - 00:42:50
- Post Quantum Vs Classical:
- ·KZG-based DKG breaks entirely under quantum attack; single preprocessing step breaks binding classically thereafter - 00:03:47
- ·Post-quantum schemes (MLDSA ~2.5KB sigs, ML-KEM ~1.5KB ciphertext overhead) too large for practical mempool use today - 00:06:03
- ·Consensus: quantum break of threshold encryption removes mempool privacy only; does not enable signature forgery — lower severity than other quantum threats - 00:12:16
- ·Jan argues classical-only is acceptable risk: quantum computers would attack higher-value targets first; encrypted mempool can be voted off if threat materializes - 00:29:26
- ·Gottfried: client teams (implementers) should decide if they're willing to build a non-post-quantum-secure interim solution — their answer gates the entire path - 00:54:33
- Whitelist And Enshrined Design:
- ·Jannik: non-enshrined approach (out-of-protocol threshold encryption) sidesteps post-quantum debate entirely; allows faster iteration - 00:35:12
- ·Anders: EIP-8105 trusted-set design extended with directed-graph construction to achieve censorship resistance via highest top-block-fee canonical set - 00:57:50
- ·Whitelist (validator-voted) design achieves censorship resistance simply; optionality solved once early-decrypt problem is addressed - 00:58:19
- Collusion Resilience And Accountability:
- ·Cryptographic snitching and traitor-tracing schemes exist in literature but are highly theoretical, inefficient, and not practical for mempool use - 00:45:55
- ·Jan: naive classical scheme may offer some traitor-tracing; proving collusion to others remains the hard unsolved problem - 00:48:43
Action Items
- •Justin Florentine (Besu) - Poll client teams on willingness to implement a non-post-quantum-secure interim encrypted mempool solution - 00:54:33
- •Anders Elowsson - Post directed-graph censorship-resistance design for EIP-8105 to Ethereum Magicians and socialize on Telegram - 00:59:43
Key decisions
No decision yet on classical vs. post-quantum path; question escalated to client teams as primary gate
The decision to escalate the question to client teams as primary gatePoll client teams on willingness to implement a non-post-quantum-secure interim encrypted mempool solution
Client teams will be polled on their willingness to implement a non-post-quantum-secure interim solution

