This article was first published on OntologyNetwork - Medium
In the last tech point article, we looked at the definitions of CounterFactual state channel and concluded with some of its main features, including equivalence, fairness, and consistency. In this article, we will continue to analyze the three criteria in its definition and talk about its application boundary.
Analyze the three criteria of CF state channel
The first criterion is equivalence. Since equivalence must be two-way, the smart contract execution environment in the state channel must be applicable to both the state channels and the blockchain, which requires:
1. All input information of operation X in the state channel can only come from operation X itself.
The smart contract can only rely on the state of the smart contract itself and not on any information from the blockchain (for example, block height and block time).
In addition, relevant information must be initialized when creating and initializing the CF state channel. Since the CF state channel is independent of the blockchain and the state of smart contract on the blockchain is subject to constant change, unlike on-chain transactions, the CF state channel cannot anchor and access any on-chain data and can only access the unchangeable data in the on-chain state.
2. The way operation X is carried out on the blockchain and in the CF state channel must be consistent.
This is particularly true for software engineering. Since smart contract platforms may have flaws and the history of blockchain software cannot be tampered with, blockchain platforms can only upgrade its software through forking, which will cause some trouble for the CF state channel. Great care must be taken during software upgrade on blockchain platforms or shutting down the CF state channel instantly to ensure the equivalence in the CF state channel and on the chain.
the second criterion is fairness. State update caused ...
To keep reading, please go to the original article at:
OntologyNetwork - Medium