Crypto Insights
Understanding Simplicity’s Design and Programming with SimplicityHL
Simplicity is a low-level programming language still under development, designed to be more flexible and expressive than Bitcoin Script. It enables verification of program security, safety, and cost, while also offering native Merklized scripting, formal semantics, and type checking.
Russell O'Connor, the creator of Simplicity, recently published a series of posts detailing its design and features:
Additionally, developer sanket1729 introduced how to write Simplicity programs with SimplicityHL.
Using Simplicity on Bitcoin would require a soft fork, though no proposal has yet been made. Simplicity is currently supported on ElementsProject.org and in a test branch of Bitcoin Core.
Deterministic Key Backup and Seed Management by Combining BIP Proposals
According to BIP-93 (also named Codex32), Codex32 is a human-readable encoding that uses Shamir’s Secret Sharing to split a private key into multiple parts. The full key can be reconstructed from any threshold number of shares. Meanwhile, BIP-85 describes how a master seed can deterministically derive mnemonics for multiple wallets. These mnemonics can always be recreated from the master seed, but if one leaks, the master seed itself remains secure.
Ben Westgate proposed integrating BIP-93 and BIP-85, using BIP-85 to deterministically generate codex32 strings. This would enhance deterministic wallet backup and seed management. Users could generate a set of key shares from their master seed which, when combined, form a new wallet key. Even if that key is compromised, the master seed remains safe.
Confidential Script: Emulating Soft Forks with Stateless TEEs
Josh Doman released a Rust library, confidential-script-lib, for simulating Bitcoin Script by converting script-path spends into key-path spends. Designed primarily for use in Trusted Execution Environments (TEEs), the library verifies spending conditions and then authorizes the transaction using a deterministically derived private key. This enables execution of complex scripts— including opcodes not yet supported by the Bitcoin protocol—while preserving confidentiality. On-chain cost is minimized to a single key-path spend, and the library is compatible with rust-bitcoinkernel, or **a fork of it.
2-Minute History of OP_RETURN
This short article clearly captures the purpose and limitations of the OP_RETURN field, as well as the debate around increasing its current 80KB limit to 100KB. Supporters argue that this confines arbitrary data storage to OP_RETURN, preventing UTXO database bloat. Opponents worry that large amounts of data could be abused to store illegal content. The controversy has split the Bitcoin community, with some users turning to the alternative Bitcoin Knots node implementation—whose usage grew over 700% in 2025.
NIP-EE Joins Nostr Protocol, Enabling Secure Group Chats
Direct messaging has long been a weakness in Nostr. Recently, Coracle developer hodlbod announced that NIP-EE has been merged into the Nostr protocol specification to improve direct and group messaging. With the new Messaging Layer Security (MLS) protocol, NIP-EE brings decentralized and secure group chats closer to reality.
NIP-EE was introduced by Jeff Gardner of White Noise, bringing end-to-end encrypted messaging to Nostr via MLS. While earlier NIPs—NIP-04 and NIP-17—supported encrypted messaging, they suffered from issues such as lack of forward secrecy, and no group messages support. MLS offers Signal-protocol-like security properties but with better scalability for large groups.
Papa Swap: A Faster, Cheaper Submarine Swap Protocol than HTLC
Super Testnet recently introduced the Papa Swap protocol—a submarine swap protocol faster, cheaper, and simpler than HTLC (Hashed Timelock Contract). Unlike regular submarine swaps, which require two on-chain transactions, Papa Swap needs only one. This cuts costs in half and doubles speed. It also leverages Taproot for further cost savings, making scripts more efficient than under segwit v0.
Lightning Network Isn’t for Everyone—and That’s Its Value
This article argues that many Bitcoiners mistakenly view Lightning’s reliance on custodians as a compromise against decentralization, believing it should be plug-and-play and fully sovereign like running a Bitcoin full node. The author counters that this is a misunderstanding: custodial wallets may seem like a compromise, but they are reasonable given the technical and financial barriers to running a Lightning node.
Instead of universal simplicity, Lightning provides focused, high-leverage software. It should be seen as robust, scalable enterprise-grade payment infrastructure—best suited for professional operators: Bitcoin exchanges, payment processors, wallet developers, rather than everyday users. Lightning’s true role is as high-leverage infrastructure, enabling innovative solutions for the edges of the global economy.
Starknet’s Latest Release Grinta: Advancing Decentralization with Distributed Multi-Sequencer Architecture
Starknet’s newest release, Grinta (formerly v0.14.0) adopts a distributed sequencer architecture, where three independent sequencers rotate block production through consensus (previously handled by a single sequencer). This marks a major milestone in Starknet’s decentralization journey.
Other user-facing features of Grinta include subsecond pre-confirmations, a mempool, a fee market, and a standardized integration to paymaster.
BitVMX Introduces WISCH Data Signing Scheme, Reducing Data Signing Costs
At BTC++ Istanbul, Fairgate from the BitVMX ecosystem presented a new data signing scheme WISCH. Compared with Winternitz, it reduces signing costs by at least 4×, and by 8× compared to Lamport or garbled circuits.
In another session, Fairgate introduced FLEX—capital-efficient fraud proofs for Bitcoin bridges, addressing the long-standing challenge of capital lock-up in Bitcoin bridges.
Block’s Principles for Safely Adopting Generative AI
Block’s product security team introduced a set of principles for generative AI security, guiding its safe use in products and platforms. Built on Block’s Data Safety Levels (DSL-1 through DSL-4), these principles ensure security measures scale with data sensitivity.
Key recommendations include treating LLM outputs as untrusted input, avoiding LLMs for access control, preventing direct execution of generated content, applying least privilege, sanitizing training data, and requiring human review for high-impact or user-facing scenarios.
Ethereum L2s and the Illusion of Security: Bridges, Sequencers, and Governance Trust Gaps
This article examines the practical limits of Ethereum’s promise that L2 assets are “secured by Ethereum.” While Ethereum promotes a “rollup-centric” roadmap to balance scalability and decentralization, actual user fund security depends largely on bridges. As of August 29, 2025, rollups held around $43.96 billion, but two-thirds of those assets are bridged or natively issued—no longer fully secured by Ethereum. Moreover, rollups are diverging: some rely on external bridges for liquidity and speed, while others focus on official bridges or native assets. Even with official bridges, users face risks from centralized sequencers, corporate-style governance, and limited composability. This exposes the gap between Ethereum’s ideals and reality.
The author concludes that only by integrating transaction validity, ordering, and account security under Ethereum itself can rollups truly be “secured by Ethereum.”
From Geek Experiments to Enterprise Infrastructure: The Rise of Enterprise Blockchains
This post highlights how enterprises like FIFA (FIFA blockchain), Toyota (mobile orchestration network), and J.P. Morgan (Kinexys) are embracing blockchain. The line between crypto-native and enterprise ecosystems is blurring. The rise of enterprise chains shows blockchain is maturing into global infrastructure trusted by major institutions.
But with this trend comes a weakening of crypto’s core ethos of permissionless innovation. Compliance, efficiency, and control take precedence over decentralization. Still, even public chains face debates over validator counts, architecture, and decentralization. From the end-user perspective, most don’t care whether their transaction settles on a public L1, consortium chain, or enterprise subnet—what matters is whether the application feels smooth, secure, and reliable.
