#数字资产市场动态 Is the Road to Native ZK on Ethereum Feasible?
In the past couple of days, I saw Tomasz K. Stańczak share a roadmap for zkEVM proof integration, and honestly, it’s quite shocking. Basically, it’s about embedding ZK verification capabilities directly into Ethereum L1, making the mainnet the coordination layer and final verifier for all Rollups, especially zkRollups. It sounds ambitious, but the logic is indeed solid:
First is unified security. If L1 can natively verify zk proofs, the security of Rollups is on par with the mainnet, no longer relying on additional trust assumptions — this is a huge confidence booster for users. Second is the expansion ceiling being lifted. Verifying a single proof can handle massive amounts of transactions, significantly increasing gas limits, which benefits both L1 throughput and Rollup scalability. Third is simplified architecture, as Rollup designs can be more streamlined since they can directly leverage L1’s verification advantages.
But lofty ideals often face harsh realities.
ethPandaOps recently pointed out a key issue — while the data availability layer’s Blob expansion isn’t problematic per se, the MEV game played by proposers is subtly sabotaging progress. These actors deliberately delay block publication to maximize profits, causing validator voting rates to plummet. To be clear: scaling isn’t just a technical challenge; it’s an ongoing tug-of-war between incentives and protocol rules. This is exactly how mechanisms like ePBS are designed.
In the medium term, projects like Boundless, which represent the next generation of Rollup infrastructure, offer hope. Existing OP Rollups can be upgraded to ZK security models at low cost, reducing finality from days to hours or even minutes — this isn’t just a concept; it’s happening in real time.
This shows that both questions have answers: first, ZK technology costs have dropped to a level suitable for large-scale deployment; second, the market’s demand for fast finality and strong security is real and not just hype.
In this cycle, projects and developers who can see this pattern clearly may truly benefit from the opportunities.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
23 Likes
Reward
23
10
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GasDevourer
· 01-19 03:04
ZK native sounds good, but the MEV part is really a tumor. The fee terminators are about to start celebrating again.
Can ePBS cure the root cause, or is it just another patch-on-patch story?
The Boundless upgrade from OP to ZK, if it can really run smoothly, will bring costs straight down. It'll depend on who acts quickly at that time.
View OriginalReply0
OldLeekNewSickle
· 01-18 18:30
Honestly, this set of logic sounds perfect, but the MEV part is indeed a pit. The proposer deliberately delays block release to extract more, isn't that the flavor of a Ponzi scheme? No matter how advanced the scaling technology is, it still relies on incentive mechanisms as a safety net.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeSurvivor
· 01-18 13:53
To be honest, ZK native sounds great, but MEV really is shooting oneself in the foot.
Let's wait until ePBS is truly implemented before bragging; right now, validators are just idling.
The infrastructure for Rollups is indeed moving, but at what point does the cost reduction qualify as "large-scale adoption"? We still need data to speak.
Who can capitalize on this cycle's benefits depends on who can keep their composure and not be swayed by the market.
I've long been watching the ZK direction, just waiting to see who can truly bring it to fruition.
View OriginalReply0
ruggedNotShrugged
· 01-16 04:20
Hourly finality sounds great, but the MEV pit really needs to be filled properly, or it's all for nothing.
View OriginalReply0
MysteryBoxAddict
· 01-16 04:18
Are you still dreaming about zk? MEV is definitely a stubborn obstacle.
View OriginalReply0
SerumSquirter
· 01-16 04:15
zkEVM this thing is really coming to fruition, I can't hold back anymore...
---
To be honest, MEV is the real cancer, all technical solutions are useless
---
Boundless has been making a lot of noise, but converting from OP to ZK can really be that smooth? I'm a bit skeptical
---
Finality from seconds to minutes... if this really happens, Boss Li should increase his Ethereum holdings
---
The unified security approach is indeed brilliant, but who will bear the verification costs?
---
Alright, it seems this round of non-ZK native projects won't be invested in anymore
---
After fixing the ePBS, MEV issues are just the beginning of real profit
View OriginalReply0
LayerZeroHero
· 01-16 04:14
ZK burning into L1 sounds very sexy, but the MEV part is really a trap. The proposers need to be properly managed.
View OriginalReply0
DegenGambler
· 01-16 04:06
Really? Those MEV guys are intentionally delaying blocks? That's just too outrageous.
---
ZK native sounds awesome, but the incentive mechanism is truly a bottomless pit.
---
Projects like Boundless are the ones really doing work, unlike some that keep ghosting every day.
---
Finality is almost there, but what about Gas fees? That's what users really care about.
---
Ultimately, it depends on the specific implementation. A good roadmap doesn't guarantee feasibility.
---
If ePBS can truly solve MEV gaming, that would be amazing. Right now, everyone is saying no one has actually done it.
---
I just want to know when I can experience the benefits of ZK nativeization. Another two years of waiting?
---
Has the cost of upgrading Rollup to the ZK model really come down? Do you have actual data, my friend?
---
Who can see through this cycle and reap the benefits? The key is having enough capital and time. What about us small retail investors?
---
Simplified architecture sounds great, but can verification efficiency really improve that much? Feels like just another tech hype.
View OriginalReply0
WenMoon42
· 01-16 04:02
Hmm... it sounds pretty good, but MEV is really a thorn in the side. Can it be solved?
View OriginalReply0
AlwaysQuestioning
· 01-16 04:01
Wait, is the MEV game delay block production really that serious? Feels like I've been fooled.
---
ZK native sounds great, but without a solid incentive mechanism, it's still useless.
---
Has Boundless really got a project running smoothly, or is it just another PPT concept?
---
To put it simply, it's still a matter of technical costs and market demand; everything else is noise.
---
In that case, is it a bit late to get into ZK-related projects now?
---
From days to minutes, is this data reliable? Feels a bit exaggerated.
---
Can ePBS really solve the MEV problem, or is it just another gamble?
---
So what should I buy now? This article talks for a long time but doesn't give a clear direction.
#数字资产市场动态 Is the Road to Native ZK on Ethereum Feasible?
In the past couple of days, I saw Tomasz K. Stańczak share a roadmap for zkEVM proof integration, and honestly, it’s quite shocking. Basically, it’s about embedding ZK verification capabilities directly into Ethereum L1, making the mainnet the coordination layer and final verifier for all Rollups, especially zkRollups. It sounds ambitious, but the logic is indeed solid:
First is unified security. If L1 can natively verify zk proofs, the security of Rollups is on par with the mainnet, no longer relying on additional trust assumptions — this is a huge confidence booster for users. Second is the expansion ceiling being lifted. Verifying a single proof can handle massive amounts of transactions, significantly increasing gas limits, which benefits both L1 throughput and Rollup scalability. Third is simplified architecture, as Rollup designs can be more streamlined since they can directly leverage L1’s verification advantages.
But lofty ideals often face harsh realities.
ethPandaOps recently pointed out a key issue — while the data availability layer’s Blob expansion isn’t problematic per se, the MEV game played by proposers is subtly sabotaging progress. These actors deliberately delay block publication to maximize profits, causing validator voting rates to plummet. To be clear: scaling isn’t just a technical challenge; it’s an ongoing tug-of-war between incentives and protocol rules. This is exactly how mechanisms like ePBS are designed.
In the medium term, projects like Boundless, which represent the next generation of Rollup infrastructure, offer hope. Existing OP Rollups can be upgraded to ZK security models at low cost, reducing finality from days to hours or even minutes — this isn’t just a concept; it’s happening in real time.
This shows that both questions have answers: first, ZK technology costs have dropped to a level suitable for large-scale deployment; second, the market’s demand for fast finality and strong security is real and not just hype.
In this cycle, projects and developers who can see this pattern clearly may truly benefit from the opportunities.