Key takeaways

Blockchain began with Bitcoin as a store of value and evolved with smart contract platforms like Ethereum, enabling decentralized applications and more versatile use cases.

Bitcoin focuses on security and immutability, while layer-1 (L1) chains like Ethereum and Solana and layer 2s (L2s) prioritize smart contracts, scalability and developer ecosystems. App chains like Cosmos enable application-specific blockchains.

L2s — e.g., Arbitrum, ZKsync — offer cheaper, faster transactions on Ethereum, while L3s and app chains provide further customization for specific use cases, but they create new interoperability challenges.

Cross-chain bridges, such as Wormhole and Synapse, allow assets to move between blockchains, easing interoperability, but they have presented security risks, as seen in the Ronin and Wormhole hacks.

Blockchain technology has evolved dramatically since the introduction of Bitcoin in 2008. Initially, the blockchain focused primarily on enabling decentralized digital currency, but over time, its applications have expanded far beyond just payments. The introduction of smart contracts with Ethereum opened the doors to decentralized applications (DApps), decentralized finance (DeFi) and a wide range of innovative blockchain-based ecosystems.

As more blockchains developed, each with its distinct capabilities and narratives, a need for interoperability allowing different blockchains to communicate and exchange value became essential.

This guide explores how blockchains have evolved into a cross-chain world, the different types of blockchain networks, and the ongoing challenges and risks associated with blockchain interoperability. Ready to dive in?

From single chains to a cross-chain world

Initially, blockchains functioned independently, each with its own isolated ecosystem. Bitcoin established itself as a decentralized, censorship-resistant store of value. But what if you wanted more from blockchain?

That desire for more versatile blockchain networks led to the rise of Ethereum and other smart contract platforms. Ethereum introduced a programmable blockchain, allowing developers to build decentralized applications that automated functions without intermediaries.

As new chains such as Solana and other layer-1 (L1) and layer-2 (L2) solutions entered the scene, each with its own unique approach to scalability, security and transaction speed, a multichain ecosystem began to emerge. This cross-chain world where different blockchains coexist, communicate and interoperate becomes necessary as these blockchain ecosystems mature.

So, how do these blockchains interact? Let’s find out.

Blockchain networks and their narratives

While there are several blockchains, they have all tried to focus on certain positioning or narrative.

Bitcoin (store of value)

Bitcoin continues to hold the dominant narrative as a decentralized store of value, often referred to as digital gold. Its secure, proof-of-work (PoW) consensus model focuses on immutability and security over transaction speed.

Smart contract platforms (Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, etc.)

Ethereum and newer chains like Solana shifted focus from being just cryptocurrencies to enabling DApps, DeFi and non-fungible tokens (NFTs). Ethereum pioneered smart contracts, whereas newer chains like Solana prioritize speed and scalability.

Layer-2 solutions (Ethereum L2s)

L2 networks like Arbitrum, Optimism and ZKsync build on top of Ethereum to offer lower fees and faster transactions while still leveraging Ethereum’s security. These networks solve many scalability issues while maintaining compatibility with the broader Ethereum ecosystem.

Appchains

Chains such as Cosmos and Polkadot introduced the concept of app-specific chains, where individual blockchains are tailored for specific use cases. This offers scalability and customization but introduces new interoperability challenges when bridging these appchains to other networks.

The rise of layer 2s, layer 3s and appchains

L2 networks have emerged as a solution to Ethereum’s scalability problems, allowing developers to build faster, cheaper DApps while still leveraging Ethereum’s security. Have you noticed how these L2s, like Optimism and ZKsync, are popping up everywhere?

While these solve certain bottlenecks of the L1 (Ethereum), they also create new challenges.

The vast majority of liquidity within these L2s is inherited from Ethereum, resulting in capital fragmentation. Generally, liquidity follows attention in the cryptocurrency world, and attention is driven by the community. Have you ever thought about how fragmentation of liquidity is a consequence of fragmented communities and attention?

Layer 3s build on top of L2s, adding even more customization for specific use cases. The rise of L3s is enabling further innovation while preserving security at lower layers.

Appchains, such as those in the Cosmos and Polkadot ecosystems, allow developers to launch application-specific blockchains with their own rules, governance models and consensus mechanisms. These appchains can interoperate with other chains, but their fragmentation creates challenges in terms of interoperability and human capital allocation.

Crosschain bridges

The ability of different blockchains to communicate with one another is crucial for the development of a multichain ecosystem. Crosschain bridges, protocols that allow tokens and data to be transferred between different blockchain networks, play a pivotal role in making interoperability a reality.

In the last five years, several innovations have made interoperability more seamless. Protocols like Wormhole, Synapse and LayerZero have enabled smoother cross-chain communication. The rise of projects such as Cosmos and Polkadot, which were designed from the ground up to support multichain interoperability, has also contributed significantly to this trend.

But despite these advancements, are decentralization and security still major concerns?

Risks and vulnerabilities in crosschain bridges

While cross-chain bridges offer significant benefits, they also introduce new risks, especially at the nascent stages of development. Two high-profile incidents highlight these dangers:

• [ ] Ronin hack (2022): The Ronin bridge, used in the Axie Infinity ecosystem, was hacked for over $600 million, largely due to centralized control over the bridge’s validation mechanism.
• [ ] Wormhole exploit (2022): The Wormhole bridge, which connects Solana and Ethereum, was exploited for $325 million. This occurred because the bridge’s security was compromised, allowing attackers to mint tokens without proper validation.

These incidents underscore the need for decentralized, highly secure bridges. Many current crosschain solutions are susceptible to attacks because they rely on trusted intermediaries or centralized structures, which can become single points of failure.

Restaking is an emerging concept that could significantly enhance the security and scalability of a cross-chain world. Originally associated with Ethereum’s proof-of-stake (PoS) ecosystem, restaking allows users to use their staked assets to secure multiple protocols or chains simultaneously, effectively layering security across different networks. This concept could play a critical role in addressing some of the most pressing challenges in blockchain interoperability.

Restaking: A solution for cross-chain security?

In a multichain world, ensuring the security of cross-chain bridges and transactions is critical. Many crosschain solutions rely on centralized or semi-centralized validators, which present security risks, as evidenced by high-profile bridge hacks like Wormhole and Ronin.

But what if there was a decentralized alternative?

That’s where restaking comes in. Imagine being able to reuse staked assets to secure multiple networks or cross-chain bridges. For example, what if you could restake your Ether on Ethereum’s PoS network to help secure a crosschain bridge?

This approach enhances crosschain security by pooling validators and reducing reliance on trusted third parties. Would you feel more secure using this method?

Enhancing scalability through restaking

But restaking isn’t just about security. It could also improve scalability in a crosschain world by streamlining the validator ecosystem. Instead of needing separate validators for each chain or bridge, restaking allows for a unified validator set across multiple networks.

This reduces the overhead required to secure crosschain bridges and appchains, allowing networks to scale more efficiently without sacrificing security.

For example, in a Cosmos-based appchain ecosystem, validators could restake their assets across multiple appchains, improving resource allocation and reducing fragmentation in validator sets. Projects like EigenLayer on Ethereum and Solayer on Solana are pioneering restaking.

Restaking as a layer of economic incentives

What’s in it for validators? Restaking aligns economic incentives across the crosschain ecosystem. Validators earn rewards not just from their primary network but from the other chains or protocols they secure through restaking. This creates a more economically sustainable model for validators, ensuring that crosschain networks maintain high-security levels while incentivizing broader participation.

Does this sound like a more sustainable model?

Risks and considerations for restaking

But, like anything, restaking isn’t without risks. Overextending staked assets across too many chains could introduce security vulnerabilities, especially if the staked capital becomes insufficient to secure all the chains involved.

Additionally, restaking could concentrate validator power in the hands of a few large stakers, undermining the decentralization that PoS networks aim to achieve.

Restaking’s potential impact on cross-chain fragmentation

One of the challenges of the crosschain world is the fragmentation of human capital and community resources.

Restaking could help alleviate this issue by consolidating validator activity and reducing the need for separate security mechanisms across different chains. This would allow developers and users to focus on building more seamless, integrated crosschain applications rather than managing the complexities of multiple, isolated networks.

Challenges of a crosschain/multichain approach

While interoperability between blockchains offers great potential, it also brings certain risks and challenges:

Fragmentation of human capital and resources: As the blockchain ecosystem grows, developers and users are spread across multiple chains, leading to the fragmentation of talent, community resources and developer attention. For instance, different DeFi protocols or NFT projects exist on Ethereum, Solana and other chains, requiring teams to work on multiple platforms or specialize in one, creating silos of expertise.

Security risks: Ensuring secure and reliable crosschain bridges remains a significant challenge. As previously discussed, bridge exploits have been one of the biggest risks in recent years. A multichain world can only thrive if secure, trust-minimized crosschain communication becomes standard.

Scalability: As more blockchains interoperate, scalability becomes critical. The infrastructure supporting crosschain communication, such as bridges and oracles, needs to scale effectively to handle the increased volume of transactions and data flows.

User experience (UX): For many users, moving assets across different chains is confusing and often an expensive process. Improving UX is key to driving mass adoption of crosschain solutions, and projects must work to simplify wallet integration, transaction fees and the process of bridging assets between chains.

The future of blockchain interoperability

So, what’s next for blockchain interoperability? To fully realize the vision of a truly interoperable, multichain world, several obstacles need to be overcome.

What needs to happen to make blockchain interoperability securer, more scalable and more user-friendly?

Well, scaling solutions such as sharding, zero-knowledge rollups and optimistic rollups need to mature to support the growing demand for crosschain transactions. Additionally, crosschain security models need to become more decentralized and robust to mitigate the risks of bridge exploits.

To drive adoption, crosschain solutions need to prioritize usability. Streamlined wallet experiences, lower transaction fees, and simpler yet secure bridging mechanisms are essential to making interoperability accessible to mainstream users.

Over time, you may see the consolidation of protocols and standards, allowing for smoother communication between chains. This would reduce fragmentation and simplify the development and user experience.

Disclaimer：

1. This article is reprinted from [cointelegraph]. All copyrights belong to the original author [Arunkumar Krishnakumar]. If there are objections to this reprint, please contact the Gate Learn team, and they will handle it promptly.
2. Liability Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not constitute any investment advice.
3. Translations of the article into other languages are done by the Gate Learn team. Unless mentioned, copying, distributing, or plagiarizing the translated articles is prohibited.