"Slashing will execute automatically"—I got the impression that when reading the EOTS private key extraction process, it would be easy to come to that conclusion, but the actual process may be one step longer than I initially thought.
At first, I thought: FP double signature → EOTS private key automatically exposed → the slashing transaction automatically executes. After going through the signature conditions of the slashing transaction, I found there was an additional step in between. Once the EOTS private key extraction is complete, the vigilante needs to submit the evidence to the covenant committee. After committee members verify the evidence is valid, they use a multisig signature to authorize the slashing transaction. After the signing is finished, the slashing transaction is broadcast to the Bitcoin network and waits for confirmation.
Evidence extraction is automatic. Authentication and signing require human participation. The confirmation time on the Bitcoin network is not controlled by the protocol.
What Babylon truly automates in slashing is the step of "proving the violation." From proof to execution, there are delays for authentication and for network confirmation in between. This isn’t a design flaw—it’s the natural boundary between cryptographic proof and on-chain execution.
So what I keep focusing on isn’t whether the cryptographic design of EOTS is solid—but rather what the end-to-end latency is from evidence submission to covenant signing to Bitcoin confirmation. This number determines how quickly slashing responds in real operation.
@BabylonLabs_io $BABY #baby
At first, I thought: FP double signature → EOTS private key automatically exposed → the slashing transaction automatically executes. After going through the signature conditions of the slashing transaction, I found there was an additional step in between. Once the EOTS private key extraction is complete, the vigilante needs to submit the evidence to the covenant committee. After committee members verify the evidence is valid, they use a multisig signature to authorize the slashing transaction. After the signing is finished, the slashing transaction is broadcast to the Bitcoin network and waits for confirmation.
Evidence extraction is automatic. Authentication and signing require human participation. The confirmation time on the Bitcoin network is not controlled by the protocol.
What Babylon truly automates in slashing is the step of "proving the violation." From proof to execution, there are delays for authentication and for network confirmation in between. This isn’t a design flaw—it’s the natural boundary between cryptographic proof and on-chain execution.
So what I keep focusing on isn’t whether the cryptographic design of EOTS is solid—but rather what the end-to-end latency is from evidence submission to covenant signing to Bitcoin confirmation. This number determines how quickly slashing responds in real operation.
@BabylonLabs_io $BABY #baby