In recent months, there has been frequent activity in the cross-chain security field, with several major protocols quietly upgrading their defense systems.
LayerZero V2 has designed a decentralized verification network—out of 30 independent validators, 20 must reach consensus to confirm a cross-chain transaction. This multi-signature mechanism is quite robust from a mathematical perspective. Wormhole has taken a different approach, implementing a ZK light client scheme to achieve trustless cross-chain message verification—simply put, it uses cryptography to guarantee security instead of relying on intermediaries. Axelar's universal messaging protocol is even more impressive, supporting over 50 major blockchains.
Are these technologies effective? Security audit firm Quantstamp has released a report with quite convincing data—cross-chain protocols employing multi-layer verification mechanisms can raise the attack cost to over $1 billion. Once this threshold is reached, actual attacks on cross-chain bridges have surprisingly decreased by 70% in the most recent quarter. This indicates that these new solutions are not just lip service; they are genuinely providing protection.
Looking back at a series of cross-chain bridge hacks last year, this shift is actually very significant.
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.
15 Likes
Reward
15
7
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
GateUser-40edb63b
· 2025-12-30 22:07
Finally, someone has got this right. The 70% decline rate clearly proves to be effective.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-74b10196
· 2025-12-30 15:51
The cross-chain bridge is finally showing some movement. The bloody lessons from last year have finally led to some real upgrades. A 70% reduction in attack losses—this data speaks for itself.
View OriginalReply0
GateUser-3824aa38
· 2025-12-30 15:49
Hmm, this time the updates for LayerZero and Wormhole seem serious, not just talk.
View OriginalReply0
ProposalDetective
· 2025-12-30 15:49
Finally, someone has made defense practical and not just theoretical talk.
View OriginalReply0
ChainSpy
· 2025-12-30 15:42
A 70% decline; while the numbers look impressive, we need to wait and see. Last year's crash was pretty brutal.
View OriginalReply0
GasFeeVictim
· 2025-12-30 15:34
LayerZero's 20/30 design is indeed impressive, but to be honest... Wormhole's ZK solution is the real cutting-edge technology, and the fact that it doesn't require trusting any intermediary is absolutely groundbreaking.
View OriginalReply0
ShibaSunglasses
· 2025-12-30 15:29
Finally, someone has made cross-chain bridges reliable. The wave of hacks last year exhausted me.
In recent months, there has been frequent activity in the cross-chain security field, with several major protocols quietly upgrading their defense systems.
LayerZero V2 has designed a decentralized verification network—out of 30 independent validators, 20 must reach consensus to confirm a cross-chain transaction. This multi-signature mechanism is quite robust from a mathematical perspective. Wormhole has taken a different approach, implementing a ZK light client scheme to achieve trustless cross-chain message verification—simply put, it uses cryptography to guarantee security instead of relying on intermediaries. Axelar's universal messaging protocol is even more impressive, supporting over 50 major blockchains.
Are these technologies effective? Security audit firm Quantstamp has released a report with quite convincing data—cross-chain protocols employing multi-layer verification mechanisms can raise the attack cost to over $1 billion. Once this threshold is reached, actual attacks on cross-chain bridges have surprisingly decreased by 70% in the most recent quarter. This indicates that these new solutions are not just lip service; they are genuinely providing protection.
Looking back at a series of cross-chain bridge hacks last year, this shift is actually very significant.