Why Dusk Rewards the Person Who Catches a Bad Validator
I was looking at how @Dusk handles validators today and got stuck on one small detail
Usually when we talk about a bad validator we think about the validator getting punished
But I started wondering
Who actually finds the problem
Because if someone is doing something that can get their stake slashed the network still needs someone to notice it and report it
That’s where Dusk does something I didn’t expect
In its consensus design a participant can report a slashable offence committed by a Provisioner If the report is valid the reporter gets a portion of the stake that gets slashed
At first I thought why reward someone for reporting something that should already be checked by the network
Then it made more sense
The network isn't only relying on validators to behave honestly It also gives participants a reason to watch for dishonest behaviour
So there are basically two incentives working together
Validators have something to lose if they break the rules
And other participants have something to gain by catching them
I like this kind of design because security isn't treated as something that happens automatically in the background
Dusk is giving people a reason to actively protect the network
That small detail in the whitepaper ended up being more interesting to me than another generic Dusk is a privacy blockchain explanation
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk $NEIRO $XPL
I was looking at how @Dusk handles validators today and got stuck on one small detail
Usually when we talk about a bad validator we think about the validator getting punished
But I started wondering
Who actually finds the problem
Because if someone is doing something that can get their stake slashed the network still needs someone to notice it and report it
That’s where Dusk does something I didn’t expect
In its consensus design a participant can report a slashable offence committed by a Provisioner If the report is valid the reporter gets a portion of the stake that gets slashed
At first I thought why reward someone for reporting something that should already be checked by the network
Then it made more sense
The network isn't only relying on validators to behave honestly It also gives participants a reason to watch for dishonest behaviour
So there are basically two incentives working together
Validators have something to lose if they break the rules
And other participants have something to gain by catching them
I like this kind of design because security isn't treated as something that happens automatically in the background
Dusk is giving people a reason to actively protect the network
That small detail in the whitepaper ended up being more interesting to me than another generic Dusk is a privacy blockchain explanation
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk $NEIRO $XPL