RIP-7560: Native Account Abstraction

Reading time saved: 8 minutes

18 replies, 3744 views, 19 likes



RIP-7560 proposes integrating Native Account Abstraction into Ethereum to optimize transaction processing and standardize AA, especially for rollups, but it raises concerns about increased complexity and security risks. The community is actively discussing the potential benefits and drawbacks, with no vote yet, but ongoing dialogue is key to refining the proposal.

What is this about?

The discussion revolves around RIP-7560, a proposal for Native Account Abstraction (AA) on Ethereum, which seeks to integrate EIP-2938 and ERC-4337 into the Ethereum consensus-layer protocol. This integration would introduce a new transaction process with distinct stages for validation, execution, and post-transaction logic. The proposal is designed to standardize and optimize AA, particularly for rollups, and to avoid fragmentation in the wallet ecosystem.

How is the community reacting?

The community's reaction is varied. Some, like Cejay and Pantaovay, are optimistic about the potential for gas optimization and compatibility with ERC-4337, which could lead to broader AA adoption. However, concerns have been raised about the complexity it adds to the core protocol and the potential security risks. Ivshti and Yoavw have discussed the management of unused gas in AA transactions and the risks it poses for block builders. Makemake and PixelCircuits are worried about the increased complexity and the risk of committing to a specific AA standard. Alex-forshtat-tbk has been actively engaging with the community, addressing concerns about "unused gas" and Signature Aggregation.

Yoavw has highlighted the risks of embedding an AA system similar to ERC-4337 into the "OS" of Layer 2 chains, which could increase the bug surface area and potentially alienate users. However, they also noted that some L2 chains have already integrated native AA systems to optimize user experience and efficiency, and that the Ethereum ecosystem allows users to choose among various L2 options.

Why this is positive?

  • Potential for gas optimization and more efficient transaction processing.
  • Compatibility with ERC-4337 could lead to broader AA adoption.
  • Active community engagement is helping to refine the proposal.
  • Standardization for rollups could prevent fragmentation in the wallet ecosystem.

Why this is negative?

  • Increased complexity in the core protocol may lead to new security risks and bugs.
  • Committing to a specific AA standard could inhibit future innovation.
  • Handling of unused gas raises concerns for block builders and could be exploited in attacks.
  • Embedding an AA system into the "OS" of L2 chains could increase the bug surface area and alienate some users.

Next actions

The community is encouraged to continue the discussion and contribute to the refinement of the proposal on GitHub and community forums. There is no current vote or snapshot, but participation in the dialogue is crucial for addressing the concerns and evolving the proposal.

Posted 17 days ago

Last reply 5 days ago

Summary updated 5 days ago

Last updated 04/12 00:21