PoS security wrt L2 risk

Nick said in his L2 talk “you always need to have more money staked than is at risk.”
This makes complete sense.

In Celestia, the amount of money at risk should malicious validators drop a blob is determined by the L2 behind the blob and the L2’s interpretation of the blob, to which Celestia is oblivious.

How then does Celestia with its PoS satisfy Nick’s basic security requirement and ensure that more money is staked on Celestia than is at risk in all L2s it serves?


Hey Joseph, when I said “you always need more money staked than is on the L2” I was specifically referring to an L2 secured by a DAC with crypto-economic security. That’s because in this security model you are trusting the DAC participants to be rational and not steal money that is worth less than the stake that will be slashed.

In a DAS security model, this is not the case because the L2 does not need to trust the validators of the network not to withhold data, the L2 users can verify that the data is available directly by sampling it. So in a DAS model (and in general when users directly verify the chain they are using) you can have more value in the L2 than is at stake since even if the validators cheat they won’t be able to steal the value in the L2. Since Celestia supports DAS is does not have this problem.

1 Like