One evening I opened Dusk Wallet and retraced Asset Migration like handling a sum of money where mistakes were not allowed...
what made I uncomfortable was not the Bridge Fee.
but the status.
ERC20/BEP20 to Dusk Mainnet requires Approve then Execute Migration; a successful Transaction Confirmation does not mean Mainnet Migration has already run.
two signatures, one wrong step and the Transaction Flow goes off track.
Processing Time can be close to 1 hour.
I do not need a better-looking Wallet Experience; I need Transaction Status to clearly show Pending, Processing, Completed or Failed, along with the Transaction Hash and an Asset Recovery path if there is an error.
Dusk Mainnet Bridge to BSC is even more stressful.
Memo must contain the Destination BSC Address, Bridge Fee is 1 DUSK; an incorrect Memo can cause Automated Processing to go off flow.
User Error Protection, Risk Control and Asset Security!
on 16/1, 8,068,000 DUSK left the Signing Wallet; a Bridge Attempt of 8,910,000 DUSK was stopped by Emergency Shutdown.
a difference of 842,000 DUSK, about 10.4%.
Bridge Security is not just the Consensus Layer.
it is also Signing Architecture, Bridge Isolation, Permission Management, Wallet Connection, Wallet Permissions, Transaction Signing and Access Control.
Financial-grade Infrastructure serving Regulated Onchain Finance cannot have “don’t click the wrong thing” as its primary protection mechanism.
Transaction Flow has to explain itself.
Automated Processing has to leave a trace.
Asset Recovery has to provide a way back.
DeFi can make users learn on their own; with Onchain Finance, the system has to clearly state which step is complete, which is not, and where the error is.
because Asset Security is not the feeling that “it’s probably fine”...
it has to be the ability to verify every status, every signing permission, every step of asset movement.
if I have to open the explorer three times to reassure I that the money is still in the flow... has Dusk truly reached the Financial-grade standard yet?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk
what made I uncomfortable was not the Bridge Fee.
but the status.
ERC20/BEP20 to Dusk Mainnet requires Approve then Execute Migration; a successful Transaction Confirmation does not mean Mainnet Migration has already run.
two signatures, one wrong step and the Transaction Flow goes off track.
Processing Time can be close to 1 hour.
I do not need a better-looking Wallet Experience; I need Transaction Status to clearly show Pending, Processing, Completed or Failed, along with the Transaction Hash and an Asset Recovery path if there is an error.
Dusk Mainnet Bridge to BSC is even more stressful.
Memo must contain the Destination BSC Address, Bridge Fee is 1 DUSK; an incorrect Memo can cause Automated Processing to go off flow.
User Error Protection, Risk Control and Asset Security!
on 16/1, 8,068,000 DUSK left the Signing Wallet; a Bridge Attempt of 8,910,000 DUSK was stopped by Emergency Shutdown.
a difference of 842,000 DUSK, about 10.4%.
Bridge Security is not just the Consensus Layer.
it is also Signing Architecture, Bridge Isolation, Permission Management, Wallet Connection, Wallet Permissions, Transaction Signing and Access Control.
Financial-grade Infrastructure serving Regulated Onchain Finance cannot have “don’t click the wrong thing” as its primary protection mechanism.
Transaction Flow has to explain itself.
Automated Processing has to leave a trace.
Asset Recovery has to provide a way back.
DeFi can make users learn on their own; with Onchain Finance, the system has to clearly state which step is complete, which is not, and where the error is.
because Asset Security is not the feeling that “it’s probably fine”...
it has to be the ability to verify every status, every signing permission, every step of asset movement.
if I have to open the explorer three times to reassure I that the money is still in the flow... has Dusk truly reached the Financial-grade standard yet?
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk