Présentation de ZkSync, par sisyfos - Les Amis d’Ethereum France #18

Good evening everyone. First of all, a big thank you to France and Nathan for organizing this MEOP. It's great to be here with you tonight. My name is Esteban, online CC faos. I 'm a community manager at ZK, or rather, at Mor Labs, the team behind the ZK protocol.

I've been with them for two years now. Tonight I'd like to talk to you about three topics: firstly, the Zik credo; secondly, Zik Sy; and thirdly, the Zik stack. Recently, there was an article on Vitalque's blog calling on the community to return Ethereum to Cyherpk. It's Cyherpk, it's vague, but at the same time, there are some values ​​within the Cyherpk movement that people aren't willing to compromise on. One of them, for example, is resistance to escalating security, or having systems where trust isn't necessary, where the integrity of transactions, the integrity of the blockchain, and the security and protection of...

Privacy is a value that's central to the cyberpunk movement, and the Matur team here in September published a document called the ZC Credo. It's now available on Thub in French: github/zcing/cedo. You can find it in French there, where we write down our commitment to cyberpunk values and zero-proof technology. I wanted to share this, and the ZC Credo values ​​also guide the development of our protocol. But now, let's get to the heart of the matter.

I'm going to talk about rollups. You might know that there's a large family of layer-two rollups. The two main families are optimistic rollups and Ike rollups. As Nathan and Lucas mentioned earlier, optimistic rollups are based on game theory; they're secured by social consensus, while Ike rollups are secured by mathematical proofs. Within the Zik Rollup family, we also have Vitali, who created a distinction: types 0, 1, 2, 3, and 4, which are actually different, let's say different compatibilities with VMs or equivalences with VMs.

But we could introduce another distinction: what is actually proven by the zero-knowledge proof system? If we have solutions like the ZKVM polygon or the ZKVM scroll, in which each transaction, or each transaction, in fact, the validity of the transactions is proven by a zero-knowledge proof. In systems such as StarWare or Z, what we prove is not the validity of a transaction, but the validity of the transition of Ethereum to the Ethereum virtual machine. In fact, what we prove is that Ethereum to the Ethereum virtual machine at time T and which transitions at time T + 1. We prove that this transaction/transition is valid.

There are There are many advantages to using this type of architecture. I 'll spend a few minutes presenting it, but one of them is the low chip fees and gasfixes, as well as the privacy and confidentiality of transactions. Starquare, ZK, and Zikesta use this type of architecture, where we prove that the transition to the Ethereum virtual machine is successful by using a combination of Starquare and Snark. There are three advantages I'll mention here for proving the transition to the Ethereum virtual machine. The first is when you frequently need to update storage slots; it becomes very cheap on Zquare or Starquare because you only need one storage slot to update another, and you can update it as many times as you want.

That's it. It's becoming a good market, so for example, having oracles that are extremely fast today—I think we put an oracle up roughly every 20 minutes—we can imagine oracles that are updated every second because it's actually very cheap. The second reason is that, since we're putting them together, we don't actually need the integrity of the transaction, we don't need the entire transaction, we only need a batch and then to prove that the transition is correct. In theory, we could take the data of these transactions, accessible only by the people who issue a transaction, and therefore have natively a certain form of confidentiality or privacy on the second layer, and I think this is the most important and the most interesting, is what we call horizontal scaling. That is to say, we can have vertical scaling in the case of monologic blockchains like Solana, or we can have what we Horizontal scaling is called having an infinite number of applications running but not constrained by a bottleneck, for example, like a sequencer or your power.

We saw this recently, I think, between October and January, a lot of VM chains were spammed with registrations. I don't know if you saw that, but we saw gas phishing attacks on Optimism Arbitrum, on Polygon, and ZikVM, but not on ZikVM. And in fact, one of the reasons why this happened is because we use state difference and we batch the transactions. And unlike layer one, the more transactions happen on layer two, the less expensive the gas phishing will be per transaction, I think. There's a consensus within the Ethereum community that most of the gas costs in the future, or at least in the medium term, will be primarily due to data availability costs.

We have solutions like Celestia and Agen Layer, which are starting to emerge, that aim to make these costs cheaper. We can do this and then rely on, let's say, trust assumptions, which are a bit different from Layer 1. Or we can use architectures that group all these transactions and then prove the validity of those transactions, like what we do on ZKN. I invite you to read two articles that I think are very interesting. One is written by Poulinaya (I don't know if you know the researcher), and the second is written by Onekx.

Both of them argue that Layer 1 is perhaps a very interesting design for making Ethereum scalable and inexpensive to implement. That's the... Theory, practical implementation, the first practical implementation was ZK, which is a layer two, a second layer that uses zero-knowledge proof. We upgraded our proof in December to a solution we call Bou Boujou, and since December, consistently, ZK is the layer with the lowest fees on the market, and by a large margin compared to other ZVMs, not even on large polygons or scrolling, because it uses this architecture. Another point for you: if you develop applications on VMs, you can deploy them on ZK.

There are many users; I think we have one of the highest user activities since we went on the mainnet in April of last year. And finally—and here, in quotes, we are secure. You can never be too secure, but we have done many audits with Code for Arena. We had a bounty, I think, of 1 million, Alborn, Open Zeplin, several audit trails of bits to secure, in fact, the various elements of Z-casing. Z-casing is a layer to It was created by Matterlabs, but you also have the option to create your own layer-two stack.

You may have heard of Opistac, which allows you to create superchains. It has a similar solution, but instead of using fr-proofs and optimistic rollups, you can use Z rollups, and it's called Zikestack. Zikestack is also a stack created and produced by Matterlabs. I'll show you; I invite you to visit the website zikestac.io.

Essentially, it allows you to deploy your own layer-two or layer 3, which, on Zik, will be completely customized. You can have a rollup with a centralized sequencer, you can pay your gas fees in any C20, you can have a completely private blockchain, or you can... well, whatever your needs, you can use the Zik stack. The technology behind Zik will deploy your blockchain in layer two or layer 3, which, as Lucas mentioned, will be a fractal. Scaling is very similar to what Luc presented earlier; it's the concept of fractal scaling.

From the moment blockchains share the same architecture, the same proof, the same verification, we can imagine ecosystems in which we can bridge between blockchains in a trustless way. And there you have it, we can imagine that. We do n't need to fragment liquidity between different blockchains either if you share the same architecture, the same proof, the same circuits. So, the ZKing STAC opens up scaling possibilities that are, as they say, limitless, in the sense that we can scale very horizontally with any type of application, or also vertically by adding other applications within it, for example, on layer H. So, I don't know if you have any questions about the technology; we can talk about that right after.

I just wanted to say a few words about the ZKing community. We have a large community hub in NaaS as well. In Eastern Europe, Zking, Japan, China, Ukraine, and Indonesia are large communities. Perhaps one day we'd like to have Zking in France. We're always looking for ambassadors or people willing to represent Zking worldwide.

So, if you're interested, feel free to send me a DM on Discord or Twitter, and we can discuss it. Thank you. [Applause]