ETM2026-08-19_009
Encrypt The Mempool #009
2026-08-19 3 decisions 258 transcript lines
Transcript
Call summary
Targets
- •Encrypt the Mempool MarComms Working Group — August 26, 2026 (one week from today) - 00:38:02
- •Encrypt the Mempool Tech Working Group #10 — September 2, 2026 (two weeks from today) - 00:38:13
Decisions
- •EIP-8105 CR agenda item deferred to next Tech Working Group call when Anders is present - 00:36:53
Highlights
- Documentation:
- ·EL spec PR #5403 (consensus-specs) flagged by Boma as still open and needing review or update - 00:38:23
- Enshrinement Pq Discussion:
- ·PQ acceptability depends heavily on scheme design; some designs allow a simple switch to PQ, others require full rebuilds - 00:08:40
- ·Three open questions: implementation cost, effective lifetime of non-PQ solution, and ease of transition to PQ - 00:13:11
- ·Suggested polling broader Ethereum community on whether any non-PQ protocol component is acceptable before designing anything - 00:11:37
- Eip 8105 Censorship Resistance:
- ·Anders's note on achieving CR for EIP-8105 trusted set deferred to next call when Anders returns from holiday - 00:36:16
- Validator Whitelist Governance:
- ·Voting mechanism design open: continuous re-voting raises bandwidth concerns; delegation needed to avoid burdening home stakers - 00:29:52
- ·Optional stake requirement for new key publishers proposed; stake reduced over time as trust is established - 00:34:50
- Validator Whitelist Attack Taxonomy:
- ·Attacks reframed: 'confidentiality' (key selling/sharing/misuse) vs. 'availability' (withholding); availability is protocol-detectable, confidentiality generally is not - 00:16:00
- ·Confidentiality attack impact is bounded to users who chose that key publisher; availability attack harms all users and spams the chain - 00:17:42
- ·Validator voting identified as most practical whitelist governance mechanism; per-proposer choice and coin votes deemed impractical - 00:21:10
- ·Protocol barrier for whitelist entry should be low (defend against per-tx optionality attacks only); market competition handles service selection - 00:34:06
Action Items
- •Jannik Luhn - Write up whitelist voting mechanism options (continuous vs. change-only, delegation, quorum) for next call - 00:29:52
- •All participants - Review Anders's EIP-8105 CR note ahead of next Tech Working Group call - 00:37:19
- •Boma / Justin Traglia - Review or update open EL spec PR (consensus-specs #5403) - 00:38:23
Key decisions
EIP-8105 CR agenda item deferred to next Tech Working Group call when Anders is present
Deferred until Anders returns from holidayValidator voting identified as most practical whitelist governance mechanism
Per-proposer choice and coin votes were deemed impracticalProtocol barrier for whitelist entry should be low
Designed to defend against per-tx optionality attacks only, leaving service selection to market competition