Chainlink Oracles Are Going To Leave You Rekt
The DEFI space has taken it's first big knock and I can see a few are starting realise that there is no such thing as achemy and no one has a magic money printing machine. I've seen many LUNA'tics who got rekt, starting to turn over a new leaf and become bitcoin maxi's and I guess their loss is a tution fee they paid to learn a valuable lesson.
Then you get the others who still want to double down on their mistakes, they think this is the cost of doing business, that it's part of the plan, for every one 100 that fail there will be that one moon shot that makes up for it. Everyone in DEFI thinks they're a VC investor but without the liquidity and the information assymetry when making these bets.
Surviviourship bias is a hell of a drug
I often hear the argument, yeah Luna is a shitcoin, it was bound to fail, but my shitcoin is different. Surviviourshop bias kicks in, just because your protocol hasn't failed yet doesn't mean it's immune from collpase in the near future.
The longer a shitcoin survives, the more confidence people have in it, the more confidence they have the more they allocate. The more they allocate, the more overconfident the devs become, they make mistakes, they build half arsed solutions, they discount risk and right when people are at their most bullish is when they get rugged.
Defi is risk on top of risk
The DEFI spae is made up of multiple EVM chains or EVM like chains, that can mint tokens, they usually have a native token, a stablecoin issued by a centralised provider, an algo stablecoin and a host of DEFI coins.
Now having your largest liquidty being a centralised stablecoin alone should be ringing alarm bells, but shitcoiners don't consider this an issue.
Having an algo stablecoin backed by a native token that is illiquid and under colletarlised should be a major red flag but shitcoiners discount it.
Having coins that are not native to your chain minted ontop of it through a rehypohthication bridge or a centralised entity should be a red flag but shitcoiners discount it.
Now these red flags are dangerous, but none so much as how these DEFI systems acquire their price feeds. This entire defi space is an incestious pool of shoddily built interconnected bridges of bullshit rehypothecation of assets.
They feed in prices to their smart contracts and automatic market markers through centralised entities, centralised data aggregators and then use that to feed to the various chains via pretty much centralised nodes.
If you want an overview of how the feeds are processed, each layer carrying its own risk you can see it below.
Source: - chain.link
Multiple providers means safety in numbers
Now shitcoin apologists will tell you that because the nodes are pulling in feeds from multiple providers that it's safe. If one provider's price feed is wonky, between all providers and aggregators you can find the right price.
That is true, but what isn't true is that chainlink nodes are infallible, they can be paused, their data can be corrupted, nodes can be attacked, nodes can be manipulated by those who have the keys.
In chainlinks case, it only takes 3 out of 21 keys to change a price feed, that's hardly much security if you think 3 people are responsible if that is even 3 people having 1 key each, to set the price for all these shitcoin chains and the defi protocols living on top of them.
Chainlink nodes and oracles provide a massive central point of failure that no one is talking about and when people wake up to it, it will be too late.
Don't take my word for it
What do you good people of HIVE think?
So have at it my Jessies! If you don't have something to comment, "I am a Jessie."
|Earn Free bitcoin & shop||Earn Free Bitcoin & shop||Claim Free Bitcoin & Shop|
Posted Using LeoFinance Beta