Nazadnje urejeno: , 14. februar 2024
With the proliferation of L1 blockchains and L2 scaling solutions, alongside an ever-growing number of decentralized applications going cross-chain, the need for communication and asset movement across chains has become an essential part of network infrastructure. Different types of bridges exist to help make this possible.
Bridges exist to connect blockchain networks. They enable connectivity and interoperability between blockchains.
Blockchains exist in siloed environments, meaning there is no way for blockchains to trade and communicate with other blockchains naturally. As a result, while there could be significant activity and innovation within an ecosystem, it is limited by the lack of connectivity and interoperability with other ecosystems.
Bridges offer a way for isolated blockchain environments to connect with each other. They establish a transportation route between blockchains where tokens, messages, arbitrary data, and even smart contract calls can be transferred from one chain to another.
Put simply, bridges unlock numerous use cases by allowing blockchain networks to exchange data and move assets between them.
Blockchains have unique strengths, weaknesses, and approaches to building applications (such as speed, throughput, costliness, etc.). Bridges help the development of the overall crypto ecosystem by enabling blockchains to leverage the innovations of each other.
For developers, bridges enable the following:
- the transfer of any data, information, and assets across chains.
- unlocking new features and use cases for protocols as bridges expand the design space for what protocols can offer. For example, a protocol for yield farming originally deployed on Ethereum Mainnet can offer liquidity pools across all EVM-compatible chains.
- the opportunity to leverage the strengths of different blockchains. For example, developers can benefit from the lower fees offered by the different L2 solutions by deploying their dapps across rollups, and sidechains and users can bridge across them.
- collaboration among developers from various blockchain ecosystems to build new products.
- attracting users and communities from various ecosystems to their dapps.
While there are many types of bridge designs(opens in a new tab), three ways to facilitate the cross-chain transfer of assets stand out:
- Lock and mint – Lock assets on the source chain and mint assets on the destination chain.
- Burn and mint – Burn assets on the source chain and mint assets on the destination chain.
- Atomic swaps – Swap assets on the source chain for assets on the destination chain with another party.
Bridges can usually be classified into one of the following buckets:
- Native bridges – These bridges are typically built to bootstrap liquidity on a particular blockchain, making it easier for users to move funds to the ecosystem. For example, the Arbitrum Bridge(opens in a new tab) is built to make it convenient for users to bridge from Ethereum Mainnet to Arbitrum. Other such bridges include Polygon PoS Bridge, Optimism Gateway(opens in a new tab), etc.
- Validator or oracle based bridges – These bridges rely on an external validator set or oracles to validate cross-chain transfers. Examples: Multichain and Across.
- Generalized message passing bridges – These bridges can transfer assets, along with messages and arbitrary data across chains. Examples: Axelar, LayerZero, and Nomad.
- Liquidity networks – These bridges primarily focus on transferring assets from one chain to another via atomic swaps. Generally, they don’t support cross-chain message passing. Examples: Connext and Hop.
With bridges, there are no perfect solutions. Rather, there are only trade-offs made to fulfill a purpose. Developers and users can evaluate bridges based on the following factors:
- Security – Who verifies the system? Bridges secured by external validators are typically less secure than bridges that are locally or natively secured by the blockchain’s validators.
- Convenience – How long does it take to complete a transaction, and how many transactions did a user need to sign? For a developer, how long does it take to integrate a bridge, and how complex is the process?
- Connectivity – What are the different destination chains a bridge can connect (i.e., rollups, sidechains, other layer 1 blockchains, etc.), and how hard is it to integrate a new blockchain?
- Ability to pass more complex data – Can a bridge enable the transfer of messages and more complex arbitrary data across chains, or does it only support cross-chain asset transfers?
- Cost-effectiveness – How much does it cost to transfer assets across chains via a bridge? Typically, bridges charge a fixed or variable fee depending on gas costs and the liquidity of specific routes. It is also critical to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of a bridge based on the capital required to ensure its security.
At a high level, bridges can be categorized as trusted and trustless.
- Trusted – Trusted bridges are externally verified. They use an external set of verifiers (Federations with multi-sig, multi-party computation systems, oracle network) to send data across chains. As a result, they can offer great connectivity and enable fully generalized message passing across chains. They also tend to perform well with speed and cost-effectiveness. This comes at the cost of security, as users have to rely on the security of the bridge.
- Trustless – These bridges rely on the blockchains they are connecting and their validators to transfer messages and tokens. They are 'trustless' because they do not add new trust assumptions (in addition to the blockchains). As a result, trustless bridges are considered to be more secure than trusted bridges.
To evaluate trustless bridges based on other factors, we must break them down into generalized message passing bridges and liquidity networks.
- Generalized message passing bridges – These bridges excel with security and the ability to transfer more complex data across chains. Typically, they are also good with cost-effectiveness. However, these strengths generally come at the cost of connectivity for light client bridges (ex: IBC) and speed drawbacks for optimistic bridges (ex: Nomad) that use fraud proofs.
- Liquidity networks – These bridges use atomic swaps for transferring assets and are locally verified systems (i.e., they use the underlying blockchains’ validators to verify transactions). As a result, they excel with security and speed. Moreover, they are considered comparatively cost-effective and offer good connectivity. However, the major tradeoff is their inability to pass more complex data – as they don’t support cross-chain message passing.
Bridges account for the top three biggest hacks in DeFi(opens in a new tab) and are still in the early stages of development. Using any bridge carries the following risks:
- Smart contract risk – While many bridges have successfully passed audits, all it takes is one flaw in a smart contract for assets to be exposed to hacks (ex: Solana’s Wormhole Bridge(opens in a new tab)).
- Systemic financial risks – Many bridges use wrapped assets to mint canonical versions of the original asset on a new chain. This exposes the ecosystem to systemic risk, as we have seen wrapped versions of tokens exploited.
- Counterparty risk – Some bridges utilize a trusted design that requires users to rely on the assumption that validators will not collude to steal user funds. The need for users to trust these third-party actors exposes them to risks such as rug pulls, censorship, and other malicious activities.
- Open issues – Given that bridges are in the nascent stages of development, there are many unanswered questions related to how bridges will perform in different market conditions, like times of network congestion and during unforeseen events such as network-level attacks or state rollbacks. This uncertainty poses certain risks, the degree of which is still unknown.
Here are some practical applications that developers can consider about bridges and taking their dapp cross-chain:
For developers, there are many ways to add support for bridges:
Building your own bridge – Building a secure and reliable bridge is not easy, especially if you take a more trust-minimized route. Moreover, it requires years of experience and technical expertise related to scalability and interoperability studies. Additionally, it would require a hands-on team to maintain a bridge and attract sufficient liquidity to make it feasible.
Showing users multiple bridge options – Many dapps require users to have their native token to interact with them. To enable users to access their tokens, they offer different bridge options on their website. However, this method is a quick fix to the problem as it takes the user away from the dapp interface and still requires them to interact with other dapps and bridges. This is a cumbersome onboarding experience with the increased scope of making mistakes.
Integrating a bridge – This solution doesn’t require the dapp to send users to the external bridge and DEX interfaces. It allows dapps to improve the user onboarding experience. However, this approach has its limitations:
- Assessment and maintenance of bridges are hard and time-consuming.
- Selecting one bridge creates a single point of failure and dependency.
- The dapp is limited by the bridge’s capabilities.
- Bridges alone might not be enough. Dapps might need DEXs to offer more functionality such as cross-chain swaps.
Integrating multiple bridges – This solution solves many problems associated with integrating a single bridge. However, it also has limitations, as integrating multiple bridges is resource-consuming and creates technical and communication overheads for developers—the scarcest resource in crypto.
Integrating a bridge aggregator – Another option for dapps is integrating a bridge aggregation solution that gives them access to multiple bridges. Bridge aggregators inherit the strengths of all the bridges and thus are not limited by any single bridge’s capabilities. Notably, the bridge aggregators typically maintain the bridge integrations, which saves the dapp from the hassle of staying on top of the technical and operational aspects of a bridge integration.
That being said, bridge aggregators also have their limitations. For instance, while they can offer more bridge options, many more bridges are typically available in the market other than those offered on the aggregator's platform. Moreover, just like bridges, bridge aggregators are also exposed to smart contract and technology risks (more smart contracts = more risks).
If a dapp goes down the route of integrating a bridge or an aggregator, there are different options based on how deep the integration is meant to be. For instance, if it’s only a front-end integration to improve the user onboarding experience, a dapp would integrate the widget. However, if the integration is to explore deeper cross-chain strategies like staking, yield farming, etc., the dapp integrates the SDK or API.
To deploy a dapp on multiple chains, developers can use development platforms like Alchemy(opens in a new tab), Hardhat(opens in a new tab), Truffle(opens in a new tab), Moralis(opens in a new tab), etc. Typically, these platforms come with composable plugins that can enable dapps to go cross-chain. For instance, developers can use a deterministic deployment proxy offered by the hardhat-deploy plugin(opens in a new tab).
- How to build cross-chain dapps(opens in a new tab)
- Building a Cross-Chain NFT Marketplace(opens in a new tab)
- Moralis: Building cross-chain NFT dapps(opens in a new tab)
To monitor contract activity across chains, developers can use subgraphs and developer platforms like Tenderly to observe smart contracts in real-time. Such platforms also have tools that offer greater data monitoring functionality for cross-chain activities, such as checking for events emitted by contracts(opens in a new tab), etc.
- Blockchain Bridges – ethereum.org
- Blockchain Bridges: Building Networks of Cryptonetworks(opens in a new tab) Sep 8, 2021 – Dmitriy Berenzon
- The Interoperability Trilemma(opens in a new tab) Oct 1, 2021 – Arjun Bhuptani
- Clusters: How Trusted & Trust-Minimized Bridges Shape the Multi-Chain Landscape(opens in a new tab) Oct 4, 2021 – Mustafa Al-Bassam
- LI.FI: With Bridges, Trust is a Spectrum(opens in a new tab) Apr 28, 2022 – Arjun Chand
Additionally, here are some insightful presentations by James Prestwich(opens in a new tab) that can help develop a deeper understanding of bridges:
- Building Bridges, Not Walled Gardens(opens in a new tab)
- Breaking Down Bridges(opens in a new tab)
- Why are the Bridges Burning(opens in a new tab)
"Kama ilivyoelezwa hapo juu, ""Kwa kuenea kwa blockchains za L1 na suluhisho za upanuzi wa L2, pamoja na idadi inayoongezeka ya maombi yasiyo ya msingi yanayoenda msalaba wa msalaba, hitaji la mawasiliano na harakati za mali katika minyororo imekuwa sehemu muhimu ya miundombinu ya mtandao.""" Kuna aina mbalimbali za madaraja ambayo husaidia kufanya hivyo iwezekane. Madaraja zipo kuunganisha mitandao ya blockchain. Wao kuwezesha connectivity na interoperability kati ya blockchains. Blockchain ni moja ya teknolojia za kipekee katika mazingira ya siloed, ambayo inamaanisha hakuna njia ya blockchain kufanya biashara na kuwasiliana na blockchain nyingine kwa asili. Kama matokeo, wakati kunaweza kuwa na shughuli kubwa na ubunifu ndani ya mazingira, ni mdogo na ukosefu wa connectivity na interoperability na mazingira mengine. Bridges kutoa njia kwa ajili ya mazingira ya blockchain kutengwa kuunganisha na kila mmoja. "Kuna njia ya usafirishaji kati ya blockchains ambapo ishara, ujumbe, data ya hiari, na hata simu za mkataba wa akili zinaweza kuhamishwa kutoka kwa mnyororo mmoja hadi mwingine. """ Kwa ufupi, madaraja kufungua kesi nyingi za matumizi kwa kuruhusu mitandao blockchain kubadilishana data na kuhamisha mali kati yao. Blockchains na nguvu ya kipekee, udhaifu, na mbinu ya kujenga maombi (kama vile kasi, throughput, costliness, nk). Bridges kusaidia maendeleo ya jumla crypto mazingira kwa kuwezesha blockchains kupanua ubunifu wa kila mmoja. Kwa watengenezaji, madaraja kuwezesha yafuatayo: - uhamisho wa data yoyote, habari, na mali katika minyororo. - kufungua vipengele vipya na kesi za matumizi kwa ajili ya itifaki kama madaraja kupanua nafasi ya kubuni kwa nini itifaki inaweza kutoa. Kwa mfano, itifaki ya kilimo cha mavuno iliyotumika awali kwenye Ethereum Mainnet inaweza kutoa mabwawa ya uwiano katika minyororo yote ya EVM. - fursa ya leverage nguvu ya blockchains tofauti. Kwa mfano, watengenezaji wanaweza kufaidika na ada ya chini inayotolewa na suluhisho tofauti za L2 kwa kupeleka dapps zao kwenye rollups, na sidechains na watumiaji wanaweza kuunganisha kati yao. - ushirikiano kati ya watengenezaji kutoka mifumo mbalimbali blockchain kujenga bidhaa mpya. - kuvutia watumiaji na jamii kutoka mifumo mbalimbali ya ikolojia kwa dapps yao. Ingawa kuna aina nyingi za miundo ya daraja (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), njia tatu za kuwezesha uhamisho wa msalaba wa mlolongo wa mali huonekana: - Kufunga na mint <unk> Kufunga mali kwenye mlolongo wa chanzo na mali ya mint kwenye mlolongo wa marudio. - Burn na mint  Burn mali juu ya mlolongo chanzo na mint mali juu ya mlolongo marudio. - Atomic kubadilishana <unk> kubadilishana mali juu ya mlolongo chanzo kwa mali juu ya mlolongo marudio na chama kingine. Madaraja yanaweza kawaida kugawanywa katika moja ya vikundi vifuatavyo: Madaraja ya asili - Madaraja haya kwa kawaida hujengwa ili kuanzisha uwiano kwenye blockchain fulani, na kuifanya iwe rahisi kwa watumiaji kuhamisha fedha kwenye mazingira. Kwa mfano, Arbitrum Bridge (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya) ni kujengwa ili kufanya hivyo rahisi kwa watumiaji daraja kutoka Ethereum Mainnet kwa Arbitrum. Matofali mengine kama hayo ni pamoja na Polygon PoS Bridge, Optimism Gateway (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), nk. - Validator au oracle msingi madaraja <unk> madaraja haya kutegemea nje validator kuweka au oracles kuthibitisha msalaba-mnyororo uhamisho. Mifano: Multichain na Across. - Generalized ujumbe kupita madaraja <unk> Madaraja haya inaweza kuhamisha mali, pamoja na ujumbe na data arbitrary katika minyororo. Mifano: Axelar, LayerZero, na Nomad. - Mitandao ya umwagiliaji fedha <unk> Madaraja haya hasa kuzingatia kuhamisha mali kutoka mlolongo mmoja hadi mwingine kupitia kubadilishana atomiki. Kwa ujumla, wao si kusaidia msalaba-mnyororo ujumbe kupitisha. Mifano: Connext na Hop. Kwa madaraja, hakuna suluhisho kamilifu. Badala yake, kuna tu ubadilishaji-badilishaji uliofanywa ili kutimiza kusudi. Watengenezaji na watumiaji wanaweza kutathmini madaraja kulingana na mambo yafuatayo: - Usalama <unk> Nani kuthibitisha mfumo? Madaraja salama na validators nje ni kawaida chini ya salama kuliko madaraja kwamba ni ndani au asili salama na blockchain ya validators. - urahisi <unk> Inachukua muda gani kukamilisha shughuli, na ni shughuli ngapi mtumiaji alihitaji kusaini? Kwa msanidi programu, inachukua muda gani kuunganisha daraja, na mchakato huo ni tata kadiri gani? - Connectivity <unk> Nini ni mbalimbali ya malengo minyororo daraja inaweza kuunganisha (yaani, rollups, sidechains, nyingine safu 1 blockchains, nk. Ni ngumu sana kuunganisha blockchain mpya? - Uwezo wa kupitisha data ngumu zaidi <unk> Je, daraja inaweza kuwezesha uhamisho wa ujumbe na data ngumu zaidi ya hiari katika minyororo, au inasaidia tu uhamisho wa mali ya msalaba wa msalaba? - ufanisi wa gharama <unk> Ni kiasi gani inagharimu kuhamisha mali kati ya minyororo kupitia daraja? Kwa kawaida, madaraja hulipa ada ya kudumu au inayoweza kubadilika kulingana na gharama za gesi na uwiano wa njia maalum. Pia ni muhimu kutathmini ufanisi wa gharama za daraja kulingana na mtaji unaohitajika kuhakikisha usalama wake. Katika kiwango cha juu, madaraja yanaweza kugawanywa kuwa ya kuaminika na yasiyo ya kuaminika. - kuaminika <unk> kuaminika madaraja ni nje kuthibitishwa. Wao kutumia nje seti ya verifiers (Federations na multi-sig, multi-chama mifumo ya hesabu, mtandao oracle) kutuma data katika minyororo. Kama matokeo, wanaweza kutoa uhusiano mkubwa na kuwezesha ujumbe kamili generalized kupita katika minyororo. Pia huwa na utendaji mzuri kwa kasi na ufanisi wa gharama. Hii inakuja kwa gharama ya usalama, kama watumiaji kuwa kutegemea usalama wa daraja. - Trustless <unk> Madaraja haya kutegemea blockchains wao ni kuunganisha na validators yao kuhamisha ujumbe na ishara. Wao ni 'trustless' kwa sababu wao si kuongeza dhana mpya ya uaminifu (zaidi ya blockchains). Kwa sababu hiyo, madaraja yasiyo na uhakika huonwa kuwa salama zaidi kuliko madaraja yenye kutegemeka. Kutathmini madaraja trustless kulingana na mambo mengine, ni lazima kuvunja yao chini katika generalized ujumbe kupitisha madaraja na mitandao ya uwiano. - Generalized ujumbe kupita madaraja <unk> Madaraja haya bora na usalama na uwezo wa kuhamisha data ngumu zaidi katika minyororo. Kwa kawaida, wao pia ni nzuri na ufanisi wa gharama. Hata hivyo, nguvu hizi kwa ujumla kuja kwa gharama ya connectivity kwa ajili ya mwanga mteja madaraja (kwa mfano, IBC) na kasi hasara kwa ajili ya matumaini madaraja (kwa mfano, Nomad) kwamba kutumia udanganyifu uthibitisho. - Liquidity mitandao <unk> madaraja haya kutumia atomic kubadilishana kwa uhamisho wa mali na ni mifumo ya ndani kuthibitishwa (yaani, wao kutumia msingi blockchains <unk> validators kuthibitisha shughuli). Kwa sababu hiyo, wao hufaulu kwa usalama na mwendo wa kasi. Zaidi ya hayo, wao ni kuchukuliwa kulinganisha gharama nafuu na kutoa uhusiano mzuri. Hata hivyo, biashara kubwa ni kutoweza yao kupita data ngumu zaidi <unk> kama wao <unk>si kusaidia msalaba-mnyororo ujumbe kupita. Bridges ni moja ya hacks tatu kubwa zaidi katika DeFi (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya) na bado ziko katika hatua za mapema za maendeleo. Kutumia daraja yoyote hubeba hatari zifuatazo: - Hatari ya mkataba wa smart <unk> Wakati madaraja mengi yamefanikiwa kupitisha ukaguzi, inahitajika tu kasoro moja katika mkataba wa smart kwa mali kuwa wazi kwa hacks (kwa mfano: Solana's Wormhole Bridge (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya)). - Mifumo ya kifedha hatari <unk> madaraja mengi kutumia wrapped mali mint matoleo canonical ya mali ya awali juu ya mlolongo mpya. Hii inaonyesha mazingira kwa hatari ya mfumo, kama tumeona wrapped matoleo ya ishara kutumiwa. - Hatari ya mwenzake <unk> Baadhi ya madaraja kutumia muundo wa kuaminika ambayo inahitaji watumiaji kutegemea dhana kwamba validators si collude kuiba fedha za mtumiaji. Uhitaji wa watumiaji kuamini watendaji hawa wa tatu huwaweka katika hatari kama vile kuvuta zulia, udhibiti, na shughuli nyingine mbaya. Kwa kuzingatia kwamba madaraja ni katika hatua za mwanzo za maendeleo, kuna maswali mengi yasiyo na majibu yanayohusiana na jinsi madaraja yatakavyofanya katika hali tofauti za soko, kama wakati wa msongamano wa mtandao na wakati wa matukio yasiyotazamiwa kama vile mashambulizi ya kiwango cha mtandao au rollbacks ya hali. Ukosefu huo wa uhakika huleta hatari fulani, ambazo bado hazijulikani kwa kiwango gani. Hapa ni baadhi ya maombi ya vitendo ambayo watengenezaji wanaweza kuzingatia kuhusu madaraja na kuchukua dapp yao msalaba-mnyororo: Kwa watengenezaji, kuna njia nyingi za kuongeza msaada kwa madaraja: Kujenga daraja lako mwenyewe <unk> Kujenga daraja salama na ya kuaminika si rahisi, hasa kama wewe kuchukua njia zaidi ya kuamini-minimized. Zaidi ya hayo, inahitaji miaka ya uzoefu na utaalam wa kiufundi kuhusiana na scalability na masomo ya ushirikiano. Kwa kuongezea, inahitaji timu ya mikono kudumisha daraja na kuvutia umajimaji wa kutosha ili kuifanya iweze kufanywa. Kuonyesha watumiaji chaguzi nyingi daraja <unk> Dapps nyingi zinahitaji watumiaji kuwa na token yao ya asili kuingiliana nao. Ili kuwezesha watumiaji kupata ishara zao, wao kutoa chaguzi tofauti daraja kwenye tovuti yao. Hata hivyo, njia hii ni kurekebisha haraka kwa tatizo kama inachukua mtumiaji mbali na interface dapp na bado inahitaji yao kuingiliana na dapp nyingine na madaraja. Hii ni uzoefu wa kuingizwa mgumu na wigo ulioongezeka wa kufanya makosa. Kuunganisha daraja <unk> Suluhisho hili haihitaji dapp kutuma watumiaji kwa daraja la nje na interfaces DEX. Inaruhusu dapps kuboresha uzoefu wa kuingia kwa mtumiaji. Hata hivyo, mbinu hii ina mipaka yake: - Tathmini na matengenezo ya madaraja ni ngumu na inachukua muda. - Kuchagua daraja moja inajenga hatua moja ya kushindwa na utegemezi. - Dapp ni mdogo na uwezo wa daraja. - Huenda madaraja peke yake yasitoshe. DEXs pia zinahitajika kwa ajili ya shughuli za biashara kama vile kubadilishana msalaba-mnyororo. Kuunganisha madaraja mengi <unk> Suluhisho hili hutatua matatizo mengi yanayohusiana na kuunganisha daraja moja. Hata hivyo, pia ina mapungufu, kama kuunganisha madaraja mbalimbali ni rasilimali-kuchukua na inajenga kiufundi na mawasiliano overheads kwa watengenezaji - rasilimali nadra katika crypto. Kuunganisha daraja aggregator <unk> Chaguo jingine kwa dapps ni kuunganisha daraja mkusanyiko ufumbuzi kwamba anatoa yao upatikanaji wa madaraja mbalimbali. Bridge aggregators kurithi nguvu ya madaraja yote na hivyo si mdogo na uwezo wowote daraja moja. Kwa mfano, viunganishi vya daraja kawaida huhifadhi ushirikiano wa daraja, ambayo huokoa dapp kutoka kwa shida ya kukaa juu ya mambo ya kiufundi na ya uendeshaji wa ushirikiano wa daraja. Hiyo ikisema, daraja aggregators pia kuwa na mapungufu yao. Kwa mfano, wakati wao wanaweza kutoa chaguzi zaidi daraja, wengi zaidi daraja ni kawaida inapatikana katika soko tofauti na wale zinazotolewa juu ya jukwaa aggregator ya. Zaidi ya hayo, kama vile madaraja, madaraja aggregators pia ni wazi kwa smart mkataba na teknolojia hatari (mkataba zaidi smart = hatari zaidi). Ikiwa dapp inaendelea chini ya njia ya kuunganisha daraja au aggregator, kuna chaguzi tofauti kulingana na jinsi ya kina ushirikiano ni maana ya kuwa. Kwa mfano, kama ni tu mbele-mwisho ushirikiano wa kuboresha mtumiaji onboarding uzoefu, dapp ingekuwa kuunganisha widget. Hata hivyo, ikiwa ushirikiano ni kuchunguza mikakati ya kina zaidi ya msalaba kama vile staking, kilimo cha mazao, nk, dapp huunganisha SDK au API. Ili kuanzisha programu kwenye mitandao mbalimbali, watengenezaji wanaweza kutumia programu kama vile Alchemy (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), HardHat (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), Truffle (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), Moralis (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya), na kadhalika. Kwa kawaida, majukwaa haya kuja na composable Plugins ambayo inaweza kuwezesha dapps kwenda msalaba-mnyororo. Kwa mfano, watengenezaji wanaweza kutumia deterministic kupelekwa wakala zinazotolewa na hardhat-kupelekwa plugin (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya). "Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya ""Cross-chain Dapps"" (kufungua katika tab mpya) - ""Makubaliano ya NFT"" (kufungua katika tab mpya) - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" (kufungua katika tab mpya) - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT"" - ""Kufanya kazi kwa njia ya NFT.""" Pia, jukwaa lina vifaa ambavyo hutoa utendaji mkubwa wa ufuatiliaji wa data kwa shughuli za msalaba wa mnyororo, kama vile kuangalia matukio yanayotokana na mikataba (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya). "Blockchain Bridges: Jinsi ya kujenga Mitandao ya Cryptos (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya) Sep 8, 2021 @ Dmitry Berenzon - The Interoperability Trilemma (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya) Oct 1, 2021 @ Arjun Bhupathi - Makundi: Jinsi ya kuaminiwa na kuaminiwa na madaraja kuunda mazingira ya multi-chain (inafunguliwa katika tab mpya) Oct 4, 2021 @ Mustafa Al-Bashir - ""Blockchain: Madaraja, Uaminifu ni Spectrum"" Aprili 28, 2021 @ Arjun Chand"