Is Validium a Layer 2 solution? Validium is being reevaluated by the Ethereum community.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and members of the Ethereum community have recently engaged in discussions regarding the definition of Validium and Layer 2. Validium, due to its security and practicality, seems to be gradually gaining acceptance within the Ethereum community.

Debate over Ethereum Layer 2

It all started with a tweet by Zeng Jiajun, the founder of the crypto wallet Soul Wallet, which stated: "According to the Ethereum Foundation's definition, Layer 2 = rollup." This sparked a series of discussions among Ethereum developers and community members regarding the definition of Layer 2 and Validium.

Is using an external DA considered Validium?

Daniel

Daniel Wang, the founder of the ZK-EVM Rollup project Taiko, believes that any Ethereum rollup using an external data availability layer (DA) should be considered Validium.

Vitalik

Ethereum founder Vitalik responded that the core of rollups is unconditional security, meaning users can withdraw their assets even if others collude. If the data availability layer relies on external systems and cannot achieve this, then it should be called Validium.

KanKun Upgrade | Vitalik agrees that some products should use Validiums instead of Rollups.

Is Validium a Layer 2?

As the practicality of Validium driven by DAs increases, there are questions about its legitimacy and definition.

Community Members

Community member 3cities believes that Validium is a Layer 2. As it is still a nascent industry, Layer 2 should be defined based on what the community desires and finds most useful. This is why the L2Beat website has already listed Validium projects.

Layer 2 = rollup or validium.

Liam

Liam, a developer from the Scroll community, refers to both rollups and validium as Ethereum L2. Rollups and validiums indeed have different security guarantees, which is why L2Beat tracks varying levels of risk.

Dankrad

Ethereum core developer Dankrad states that rollups, plasma, and state channels do not require significant trust assumptions, while validiums and optimiums are very different from these technologies. From a security assumption perspective, optimiums can even be considered as sidechains.

Vitalik

Vitalik believes that the core issue is:

• The names should reflect the differences in security: Validiums do have better security than multisig contracts, and the naming should reflect that. Rollups have better security than Validiums, although they are more expensive, and this should be reflected in their name.
• SNARK proofs are much more secure than fraud proofs.
• Rollups do not equal fully secure Layer 2, as it also includes plasma and state channels.

Vitalik states that something eligible to be a Layer 2 must have stronger security than multisig contracts, even if it doesn't have the same security guarantees as rollups. According to this definition, validiums meet this criterion, but optimiums based on fraud proofs may also meet the definition, although their security needs rigorous analysis.

Based on these statements, it seems that Vitalik is starting to acknowledge that validiums based on zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) may also be considered a form of Layer 2.

Validium gaining attention again

Overall, most Ethereum community members seem to believe that validiums based on zero-knowledge proofs, due to their higher security compared to simple multisig contracts, may also be considered a form of Layer 2. However, it may require a different name to reflect the difference in security.

As technology and the industry continue to rapidly evolve, there will be more discussions within the community. Nevertheless, the value and increasing recognition of validiums as an application are not affected by the outcome of these debates.