I think I worded myself wrong … It may be super strongly secure What I meant is we need a document that analyzes possibilities of front running attacks throughout the system.
If some agent is paid for some work, there is always a possibility for someone else steal the submission and get paid. Since there is lots of money potentially involved, in my opinion every single potential vulnerability needs to be analyzed.
IMHO Ethereum needs to stand out and be different by tightly addressing security. There are many projects on the market that imho will crash and fail by not addressing security seriously enough.
For the execution game with executors
“Here is one simple proposal. Allow anyone with ETH in any shard to deposit their ETH (with a 4 month lockup period), and at certain points (eg. once every Casper epoch) give depositors the ability to make claims about the state at some given height. These claims can be published into the blockchain. The claims would be of the form [height, shard, state_root, signature]. From the point of view of a node executing the state, a correct claim is given some reward proportional to the deposit (eg. corresponding to an interest rate of 5%), and a false claim means the claimer is penalized.”
Is this vulnerable to front running? Judging from the description it could be, since I could do no work, and simply intercept and resubmit someone else’s claim …
This is a particular example, though. A more general question though is should we have a separate document listing all potential vulnerabilities/weaknesses of the protocols and their impact from low to high.