Ethereum Foundation Releases First Report on "One Trillion Dollar Safety Program": Addressing six major ecological challenges related to smart contracts, infrastructure, and cloud security...

The Ethereum Foundation officially released the first report of the "One Trillion US Dollar Security Plan" "Security Challenges Overview" through the X platform yesterday (10), covering six aspects: user experience, smart contracts, infrastructure and cloud security, consensus protocol, monitoring, incident response and mitigation, and social layer and governance. (Synopsis: Ethereum's new proposal: modular architecture + privacy enhancement to comply with the EU GDPR data specification, what are the features? (Background supplement: Vitalik blurted out "Ethereum's one-year Great Leap Plan": the throughput will increase 10 times after L1 expansion) The Ethereum Foundation announced last month the launch of the "Trillion Dollar Security (1TS)" initiative, which aims to ensure that Ethereum can support billions of users to safely hold more than $1 trillion in on-chain assets, and give enterprises, institutions and governments the confidence to store and transact more than 1 in a single smart contract or application The value of trillions of dollars has propelled Ethereum to become the "civilization-level infrastructure" of the global economy. Just yesterday (10th), the Ethereum Foundation officially released the first report of the project, "Security Challenges Overview" through the X platform. The report sorts out six key security challenges for the Ethereum ecosystem and lays the groundwork for solutions to subsequent priority issues. The release of the report marks an important step in Ethereum's pursuit of higher security standards. 0. Last month we announced the Trillion Dollar Security (1TS) initiative: an ecosystem-wide effort to upgrade Ethereum’s security. Today we’re releasing the first 1TS report: an overview of the existing security challenges in the Ethereum ecosystem. pic.twitter.com/R1dhY34pDT — Ethereum Foundation (@ethereumfndn) June 10, 2025 Detailed analysis of Ethereum's six security challenges According to the "Overview of Existing Security Challenges in the Ethereum Ecosystem" report, the Ethereum Foundation is working with users, developers, and Based on extensive feedback from security experts and institutions, challenges in the following six key areas were identified: 1. User Experience (UX) The interface that users interact with Ethereum is a central source of security challenges, and a single error due to the atomicity (irreversibility) of transactions can cause significant damage. 1.1 Private key management: It is difficult for users to securely manage private keys, software wallet mnemonics are easily stored insecurely, and hardware wallets are at risk of loss, damage or supply chain attacks. Due to personnel changes and compliance requirements of enterprise users, private key management is more challenging. 1.2 Blind signing and transaction uncertainty: Users often blindly approve transactions because their wallets display unknown data, and are vulnerable to malicious contracts, phishing, fraud or front-end attacks. 1.3 Approval and permission management: The wallet has unlimited approval and no expiration date by default, and lacks permission management functions, which increases the risk of malicious applications running out of funds. 1.4 Attacked web interface: The web interface is vulnerable to DNS hijacking, malicious JavaScript injection, etc., leading users to malicious contracts or signing misleading transactions. 1.5 Privacy: Weak privacy protection exposes users to the risk of phishing, fraud, or physical attacks. Institutional users need enhanced privacy protection due to compliance or business needs. 1.6 Fragmentation: Different wallets lack consistency in transaction display, approval processing, etc., which increases the difficulty of user learning and security risks. 2. Smart Contract Security Smart contracts are a major attack surface due to transparency, and despite advances in auditing and tools, there are still vulnerabilities and development challenges. 2.1 Contract vulnerabilities: including upgrade risks, reentrant attacks, unaudited components, access control failures, cross-chain protocol complexity, and new risks of AI code generation. 2.2 Developer experience, tools, and programming languages: Tools lack security presets, uneven test coverage, low formal verification adoption, compiler defects, and language limitations, making it more difficult to deploy secure contracts. 2.3 On-chain code risk assessment: The existing risk assessment framework is difficult to apply to smart contracts, and it is difficult for institutional users to manage risks due to the assumption that the code can be changed and centralized. 3. Infrastructure and Cloud Security Ethereum-dependent infrastructure (e.g., L2 chains, RPCs, cloud services) constitutes an attack surface, and centralization increases the risk of outages and censorship. 3.1 Second Layer Chain: L2 bridging asset complexity, proving system errors, and security committee collusion risks may result in loss of funds or asset freezing. 3.2 RPC and node infrastructure: Relying on a small number of RPC and cloud providers may block user access if they are offline or censored. 3.3 DNS level vulnerabilities: DNS hijacking, domain name seizure, and phishing similar domain names threaten user access security. 3.4 Software Supply Chain and Libraries: Open source libraries are vulnerable to malicious package injection or dependency hijacking, and are attack vectors. 3.5 Front-end delivery services and related risks: If CDN and cloud hosting platforms are attacked, they may provide malicious front-ends and affect user security. 3.6 Internet Service Provider Level Review: ISPs or countries can access Ethereum through traffic blocking, DNS filtering, etc. 4. Consensus Protocol The Ethereum consensus protocol is stable, but long-term risks need to be improved to improve resistance. 4.1 Consensus vulnerability and recovery risk: Edge cases (such as validator divergence or network partitioning) can lead to consensus stagnation or loss of validator funds. 4.2 Client diversity: Client diversity protects the network, but the adoption rate of a small number of clients is low and needs to be further improved. 4.3 Concentration of staking and pool dominance: Concentration of liquid staking agreements and large operators may lead to governance capture or homogenization risks. 4.4 Undefined social reduction and coordination gaps: There is a lack of a clear mechanism to deal with malicious validators, and the social reduction process is not yet mature. 4.5 Economic and game theory attack vectors: economic attacks such as attrition attacks, strategic exits, and MEV manipulation have not been fully studied. 4.6 Quantum risk: Quantum computing may crack existing encryption technology, and quantum resistance schemes need to be designed in advance. 5. Monitoring, incident response and mitigation Security vulnerabilities need to be effectively monitored and responded to, but existing challenges limit efficiency. Contact affected teams: Difficult to contact attacked teams, delaying funding recovery. Escalating problem: difficulty in cross-organizational coordination and lack of upfront contact. Response coordination: Multi-team collaboration can lead to confusion and reduce efficiency. Insufficient monitoring capabilities: On-chain and off-chain monitoring is insufficient, making early warning difficult. Insurance access: The crypto ecosystem lacks traditional insurance options, making it difficult to mitigate losses. 6. Social Layer and Governance Ethereum's community and governance face long-term risks that affect overall security. 6.1 Staking Centralization: A large number of staking concentrations may lead to governance capture, affecting forks or transaction review. 6.2 Off-chain asset concentration: off-chain asset holders...