Public mempools create a tax. Every pending transaction is public data, creating a zero-sum game where value is extracted before execution. This is a direct consequence of state transparency and sequential ordering.
smart-contract-auditing-and-best-practices
Blog
Why Frontrunning Is a Symptom of Deeper State Design Flaws
Frontrunning isn't a bug; it's a thermodynamic law of transparent state machines. This analysis deconstructs the predictable state transition problem and evaluates architectural mitigations from commit-reveal to intent-based systems.
introduction
THE SYMPTOM
The Inevitable Tax of Public State
Frontrunning is not a bug but a structural tax levied by transparent, globally-ordered state.
The root flaw is ordering. A single, canonical block order forces transactions into a queue, making time a monetizable resource. This design flaw is why MEV searchers and Flashbots exist as necessary parasites.
Private mempools are a bandage. Solutions like Flashbots Protect or Taichi Network hide transactions but centralize power. They shift the tax from public to private, creating trusted relay cartels.
Evidence: Over $1.2B in MEV was extracted on Ethereum in 2023, a direct tax on users enabled by public state ordering.
thesis-statement
THE STATE LEAK
Thesis: Predictability Enables Extraction
Frontrunning is not a bug but a direct consequence of public, deterministic state transitions that create predictable profit opportunities.
Public mempools leak intent. Every transaction broadcast to a public mempool like Ethereum's reveals its execution path, creating a predictable state delta that searchers and MEV bots exploit.
Deterministic execution guarantees profit. The EVM's deterministic state machine ensures that if a profitable sandwich or arbitrage path exists pre-execution, it will exist post-execution, making extraction a risk-free calculation for bots.
Protocols are the attack surface. DEX designs like Uniswap V2's constant product formula create mathematically certain arbitrage opportunities after large swaps, which bots like those from Flashbots capture programmatically.
Evidence: Over $1.2B in MEV was extracted from Ethereum in 2023, primarily from predictable DEX arbitrage and liquidations, proving that extraction scales with predictability.
key-trends
STATE DESIGN FLAWS
The Three Architectural Responses to MEV
Frontrunning is not the disease; it's a symptom of a permissionless state machine where execution order is a tradable commodity.
01
The Problem: Transparent Mempools
Public mempools broadcast pending transactions, creating a free-for-all for searchers and bots. This exposes users to sandwich attacks and time-bandit attacks, extracting an estimated $1B+ annually from retail.
- Latency Arms Race: Execution depends on network proximity to validators.
- Negative Externalities: Congestion and failed transactions for non-professional users.
$1B+
Annual Extract
~12s
Attack Window
02
The Solution: Encrypted Mempools & Order Flow Auctions
Hide transaction content until block inclusion. Protocols like Flashbots SUAVE, EigenLayer, and Shutter Network encrypt intents, forcing competition on price, not latency.
- Fair Auctions: Searchers bid for the right to execute bundled transactions.
- User Protection: Eliminates frontrunning by design, returning ~90% of MEV to users/validators.
90%
MEV Returned
0ms
Latency Advantage
03
The Solution: Intent-Based Architectures
Decouple declaration from execution. Users submit desired outcomes (e.g., "swap X for Y at best rate"), not precise transactions. Solvers (like in UniswapX and CowSwap) compete to fulfill the intent off-chain.
- Eliminates Slippage Games: Solvers internalize MEV, optimizing for user price.
- Composability: Enables cross-domain transactions without user orchestration.
~20%
Better Prices
1
User Signature
04
The Solution: Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS)
Separate block building from block proposing. Specialized builders (e.g., Flashbots, Titan) construct revenue-maximizing blocks in a competitive market, selling them to proposers (validators).
- Democratizes Access: Validators capture MEV without running complex infrastructure.
- Censorship Resistance: Enforces crLists to guarantee transaction inclusion.
95%+
Ethereum Adoption
In-Protocol
Ethereum Roadmap
05
The Problem: Centralized Sequencing
Rollups like Arbitrum and Optimism initially used a single sequencer to order transactions, creating a centralized MEV cartel. This reintroduces trust and opaque extraction.
- Opaque Extraction: Users cannot audit or compete for fair ordering.
- Single Point of Failure: Censorship and downtime risk.
1
Sequencer Node
100%
Control
06
The Solution: Shared & Decentralized Sequencing
Networks like Espresso, Astria, and Radius provide a neutral, decentralized layer for ordering transactions across multiple rollups. This enables cross-rollup MEV capture and atomic composability.
- Interoperability MEV: Solvers can craft bundles spanning Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Optimism.
- Credible Neutrality: Eliminates single-rollup sequencer rent extraction.
Multi-Rollup
Atomic Bundles
~100ms
Finality
FRONTRUNNING IS A SYMPTOM
Mitigation Strategy Trade-Off Matrix
Comparing core architectural strategies for mitigating MEV and frontrunning, exposing fundamental trade-offs in state management, execution, and composability.
| Architectural Feature / Metric | Sequencer-Based Ordering (e.g., Rollups) | Commit-Reveal Schemes | Encrypted Mempools (e.g., SUAVE, Shutter) |
|---|---|---|---|
Primary Mechanism | Centralized sequencer enforces canonical order | Two-phase transaction submission with delay | Threshold encryption of transactions pre-execution |
Latency Impact on User Finality | < 2 sec (optimistic) | Reveal delay: 12-100 blocks | ~1-5 sec (encryption/decryption overhead) |
Resistance to Generalized Frontrunning | |||
Resistance to Time-Bandit Attacks | |||
Composability / Cross-Tx Dependencies | Native (full state visibility) | Broken (reveal phase required) | Preserved via encrypted state |
Relayer/Builder Incentive Model | Extractable (sequencer captures MEV) | Neutral (no in-protocol extraction) | Redistributive (via auction mechanisms) |
Implementation Complexity & Overhead | Low (leverages L1 security) | Medium (smart contract logic) | High (TEE/MPC network + consensus) |
State Bloat from Failed Txs | None (only successful txs included) | High (failed commits pollute chain) | None (failed txs filtered pre-chain) |
deep-dive
THE STATE LEAK
Deconstructing the Predictability Vector
Frontrunning is not a market inefficiency to be exploited, but a direct symptom of predictable state transitions in public mempools.
Public mempools broadcast intent. Every transaction is a public declaration of a desired future state change before execution. This creates a predictability vector that MEV searchers and bots like Flashbots' mev-geth exploit by inserting their own transactions.
The root flaw is state pre-revelation. Protocols like Uniswap V2 and Compound expose precise price impact and liquidation triggers before settlement. This deterministic outcome allows for perfect-information attacks where the attacker's profit is guaranteed.
Intent-based architectures invert this model. Systems like UniswapX, CoW Swap, and Across Protocol use solvers who compete privately to fulfill a user's outcome, not execute their exact transaction. This severs the link between declared intent and executable path.
Evidence: Over 90% of Ethereum block space is ordered by builders using MEV-Boost, a direct institutionalization of this predictability. The solution is not hiding transactions, but redesigning systems where the final state is the only public output.
counter-argument
THE STATE FLAW
Steelman: Is MEV Actually Beneficial?
Frontrunning is not a bug but a symptom of a public, unordered mempool revealing user intent before execution.
Frontrunning is inevitable in any system where transaction ordering is a free variable. The Ethereum mempool broadcasts raw intent, creating a predictable price impact that arbitrage bots exploit. This is a state design flaw, not a moral failure.
MEV is a market signal that reveals inefficiencies in state synchronization. The billions in extracted value prove that latency arbitrage and liquidity fragmentation across DEXs like Uniswap and Curve are systemic. MEV quantifies the cost of a fragmented state.
Private mempools like Flashbots are a market-based fix, not a solution. They hide intent via encrypted channels but centralize order flow to validators. This trades one problem for another, highlighting the need for protocol-level ordering rules.
Evidence: Over $1.2B in MEV was extracted from Ethereum DEXs in 2023. Protocols like CoW Swap and UniswapX now use intent-based architectures to internalize this value, proving the market is moving beyond the public mempool model.
takeaways
FRONT-RUNNING IS A SYMPTOM
Architectural Imperatives for Builders
Frontrunning isn't just a market inefficiency; it's a structural failure of public mempools and sequential execution. Fix the state model, not the symptom.
01
The Problem: Public Mempools Are a Free Lunch
Broadcasting a transaction publicly before inclusion is an invitation for exploitation. This creates a negative-sum game where value is extracted from users by bots, not the protocol.\n- MEV bots scan for >$1B annually in arbitrage and liquidations.\n- User slippage and failed transactions are direct costs.
> $1B
Annual MEV
100%
Visibility
02
The Solution: Encrypted Mempools & Pre-Confirmation
Hide transaction intent until execution. Protocols like Flashbots SUAVE and Shutter Network use threshold encryption. This shifts power from searchers back to users and validators.\n- Enables fair ordering and transaction privacy.\n- Eliminates simple frontrunning and sandwich attacks at the source.
0 ms
Attack Window
TEE/MPC
Tech Stack
03
The Problem: Sequential Execution Limits Fairness
A single, globally ordered block sequence is a bottleneck. It forces all transactions into a priority gas auction, where the highest bidder wins, not the first submitter. This is a design flaw in Ethereum's execution layer.
1
Global Queue
PGA
Mechanism
04
The Solution: Parallel Execution & Intent-Based Architectures
Process non-conflicting transactions simultaneously. Solana and Aptos do this at the VM level. A more radical approach is intent-based systems (UniswapX, CowSwap), where users specify outcomes, not transactions.\n- Increases throughput and reduces contention.\n- Changes the game from transaction ordering to solving for optimal settlement.
10k+
TPS Potential
Intent
Paradigm
05
The Problem: Proposer-Builder Separation (PBS) Is Incomplete
Even with PBS, the block builder role centralizes MEV capture. Builders have full discretion over transaction ordering within a block, creating a new layer of potential manipulation if not properly constrained.
Oligopoly
Builder Market
Full Control
Ordering Power
06
The Solution: Enshrined PBS with Commit-Reveal Schemes
Bake PBS and fair ordering rules directly into the protocol consensus. Ethereum's roadmap aims for this. Combine with commit-reveal schemes for transaction content to neutralize timing advantages.\n- Decouples block production from MEV extraction.\n- Formalizes credibly neutral block building as a protocol primitive.
L1 Native
Solution Layer
CRS
Key Mechanism
ENQUIRY
Get In Touch
today.
Our experts will offer a free quote and a 30min call to discuss your project.
NDA Protected
Confidentiality24h Response
Time to ValueDirectly to Engineering Team
No Sales Fluff10+
Protocols Shipped
$20M+
TVL Overall