Many people have never truly experienced a market crash caused by data errors. The first time I saw a clean candlestick chart completely distorted by a faulty data point, I almost blamed heaven and earth. Just because of a wrong number, the market, which was calm, instantly turned into a roller coaster—robots mistakenly thought the price was halved, triggering a chain of liquidations, retail investors frantic to close positions, and the entire market falling into chaos.
The most frightening thing is not hackers, but the unreliability of the data itself. No matter how perfect the on-chain code execution is, if the input is garbage data, the output can only be garbage. Delayed, sparse, or incorrectly sourced data can crash the entire chain. This is the fundamental dilemma faced by oracles.
Later, when I learned about dual-layer verification design, my understanding truly clicked. It’s not some advanced black technology; essentially, it’s a set of security checks and balances. Simply put, it splits the data flow into two independent stages to prevent any single part from having all the power.
The first layer is close to the data source, responsible for aggregating prices, exchange rates, and other information from multiple sources, performing initial cleaning and standardization, then signing and packaging the data. This layer is like the kitchen in a restaurant, focusing on doing the basic work well.
The second layer is close to the blockchain. It receives signed reports from the first layer, performs cross-validation and data merging, and finally outputs a trusted value to on-chain applications. This layer is like the front desk and quality inspection, ensuring that what reaches the user is of guaranteed quality.
This layered design has a core advantage: no single stage can bypass the verification mechanism. Even if the data source is compromised, the second layer’s cross-validation can detect anomalies in time. Even if a node attempts malicious behavior, the system’s transparency and multi-signature mechanisms will expose it completely.
In the current environment where data poisoning in the crypto space is frequent, this multi-layer protection mechanism has become the lifeline of oracles. From a certain perspective, the trustworthiness of an oracle ultimately depends on its number of verification layers and its degree of decentralization.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
11 Likes
Reward
11
4
Repost
Share
Comment
0/400
ForkThisDAO
· 9h ago
That's ridiculous. One data point can crash the entire market—how fragile is that?
It still seems necessary to verify across multiple chains; relying on a single oracle is too risky.
Double-layer verification sounds good, but whether it can be practically implemented depends on who executes it.
Garbage in, garbage out—this hits home. I've been scammed once before.
Is higher decentralization necessarily better? It seems to be more easily manipulated.
Oracles—trust issues with them can never be fully resolved, right?
View OriginalReply0
BearMarketSurvivor
· 9h ago
A single data point can crash the entire market. This is not alarmism; it's a battlefield I have witnessed firsthand. When the supply lines are cut, even the strongest troops will disperse.
View OriginalReply0
BlockchainRetirementHome
· 9h ago
Can a single data point crash the entire market? This is the real horror story, much scarier than a hacker attack.
View OriginalReply0
SandwichTrader
· 9h ago
A data point almost caused me to get liquidated, and I only realized later that oracles require multiple layers of verification to stay alive.
Many people have never truly experienced a market crash caused by data errors. The first time I saw a clean candlestick chart completely distorted by a faulty data point, I almost blamed heaven and earth. Just because of a wrong number, the market, which was calm, instantly turned into a roller coaster—robots mistakenly thought the price was halved, triggering a chain of liquidations, retail investors frantic to close positions, and the entire market falling into chaos.
The most frightening thing is not hackers, but the unreliability of the data itself. No matter how perfect the on-chain code execution is, if the input is garbage data, the output can only be garbage. Delayed, sparse, or incorrectly sourced data can crash the entire chain. This is the fundamental dilemma faced by oracles.
Later, when I learned about dual-layer verification design, my understanding truly clicked. It’s not some advanced black technology; essentially, it’s a set of security checks and balances. Simply put, it splits the data flow into two independent stages to prevent any single part from having all the power.
The first layer is close to the data source, responsible for aggregating prices, exchange rates, and other information from multiple sources, performing initial cleaning and standardization, then signing and packaging the data. This layer is like the kitchen in a restaurant, focusing on doing the basic work well.
The second layer is close to the blockchain. It receives signed reports from the first layer, performs cross-validation and data merging, and finally outputs a trusted value to on-chain applications. This layer is like the front desk and quality inspection, ensuring that what reaches the user is of guaranteed quality.
This layered design has a core advantage: no single stage can bypass the verification mechanism. Even if the data source is compromised, the second layer’s cross-validation can detect anomalies in time. Even if a node attempts malicious behavior, the system’s transparency and multi-signature mechanisms will expose it completely.
In the current environment where data poisoning in the crypto space is frequent, this multi-layer protection mechanism has become the lifeline of oracles. From a certain perspective, the trustworthiness of an oracle ultimately depends on its number of verification layers and its degree of decentralization.