On-Device Proof Verification is the Only Path to True User Agency

Today's wallets default to centralized RPC providers like Infura or Alchemy, making them the de facto trust anchor for 99%+ of users. This creates a single point of failure and censorship.\n- User is blind: Cannot verify state or transaction inclusion.\n- Provider risk: Can censor, front-run, or serve incorrect data.\n- Data leakage: Full transaction graph and IP address exposed.

Protocols like Helios for Ethereum or Nimbus' light clients use cryptographic proofs to verify chain state without syncing the full chain. This is the first step back to self-verification.\n- Trust minimized: Verifies consensus and execution against a known genesis.\n- Resource efficient: Requires ~100MB RAM, not 1TB+ storage.\n- Censorship resistant: Directly connected to the P2P network.

Projects like Axiom, Risc Zero, and Brevis move verification off-device but keep it cryptographically enforced. They generate ZK proofs of historical state for on-chain use, creating a proof market.\n- Verification outsourcing: Complex proofs computed by specialized provers.\n- On-chain verifiable: Smart contracts trust the proof, not a third-party API.\n- New primitive: Enables trustless historical data access for DeFi, gaming, and identity.

The ultimate form of agency is a client that verifies execution locally. zkSync's Boojum, Polygon zkEVM, and Scroll's architecture point toward a future where a phone can verify a block's validity in seconds.\n- Full sovereignty: User cryptographically verifies every transaction.\n- Privacy: No data leaks to RPCs; local execution is possible.\n- Universal access: Enables true decentralization for mobile and IoT devices.

Succinct provides a decentralized network for generating and verifying zero-knowledge proofs of arbitrary computation, enabling trust-minimized light clients.\n- Enables on-chain verification of off-chain state (like Ethereum's Beacon Chain) via zkSNARKs.\n- Powers Telepathy, a trust-minimized cross-chain bridge with ~$200M secured.\n- Reduces light client sync time from days to minutes.

Today, every wallet and dApp blindly trusts centralized RPC providers like Infura and Alchemy. They are single points of failure and censorship.\n- User has zero agency: Cannot verify the data returned is correct.\n- Centralized choke-point: A handful of nodes serve >50% of all Ethereum traffic.\n- Enables maximal extractable value (MEV) and transaction censorship.

The endgame is a light client in every wallet that verifies succinct proofs of blockchain state, eliminating trusted intermediaries.\n- User agency restored: Your device cryptographically verifies all data.\n- Censorship-resistant: Connects directly to the p2p network or any untrusted node.\n- Scalable: Proofs are tiny (~1 KB) and verify in ~10ms on mobile devices.

Brevis allows smart contracts to trustlessly compute over any historical blockchain data by generating ZK proofs of the computation.\n- On-chain dApps can request verified data from other chains (e.g., Ethereum → Avalanche).\n- Unlocks new primitives: On-chain credit scoring, data-driven DeFi yields, and provable co-investment.\n- Moves complex logic off-chain, verified with a tiny on-chain proof.

Bridges like LayerZero, Wormhole, and Axelar rely on external validator sets, creating ~$2B+ in exploited value. Users must trust a new set of actors.\n- Not trustless: Adds new trust assumptions beyond the underlying chains.\n- Complexity kills: More code and more actors mean more attack vectors.\n- Vendor lock-in: Each bridge is a walled garden of liquidity and messaging.

The only trust-minimized bridge is one that uses a ZK light client to prove state transitions of the source chain. This is the gold standard.\n- Security = Source Chain Security: No new trust assumptions beyond the two chains being bridged.\n- Protocols leading the way: Succinct's Telepathy, Polymer Labs' zkIBC, and zkBridge.\n- Future-proof: Works for any chain that can generate a ZK proof of its state.

Default RPC endpoints (Infura, Alchemy) are centralized choke points. They can censor, front-run, or serve manipulated state, making your wallet an obedient terminal.

• Single Point of Failure: ~80% of Ethereum traffic flows through a handful of providers.
• Privacy Leak: Your full transaction graph and IP are exposed.
• Protocol Risk: Reliance breaks the trustless promise of the base layer.

Current light clients (e.g., Helios) often trust a centralized 'sync committee' or a single server for block headers. This reintroduces trust assumptions and defeats the purpose.

• Weak Security Model: Assumes honest majority of a small, permissioned set.
• High Resource Barrier: Still requires ~1-2 GB of data sync, impractical for mobile.
• Delayed Finality: Users must wait for sync committee rotations for security.

Zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) allow a phone to cryptographically verify the entire chain's state transition in milliseconds, using a tiny proof (~45 KB). This is the only path to true sovereignty.

• Trustless: Verifies correctness, not provider reputation.
• Universal: Works on any chain with a zkEVM or validity proof system (e.g., zkSync, Scroll, Polygon zkEVM).
• Private: Requests data via a P2P network, breaking the RPC surveillance model.

Even with a zk proof, you need the underlying data to construct transactions. Full on-chain data is impossible on device. Solutions like EigenDA, Celestia, and Avail provide scalable data layers, but client-side sampling is still nascent.

• Bandwidth Wall: Downloading 2 MB blocks every 12 seconds is unsustainable.
• Sampling Complexity: Light clients must probabilistically sample data to ensure availability.
• Cross-Chain Fragmentation: A sovereign wallet needs a unified DA layer across ecosystems.

Generating ZK proofs is computationally expensive. The cost must be socialized or borne by the user, creating friction. Without a native token or fee abstraction, adoption stalls.

• Prover Cost: ~$0.01-$0.10 per proof on current hardware.
• No Wallet Token: Users won't pay for security they don't see.
• Protocol Subsidy: L2s may need to subsidize proofs as a public good (see zkSync's Boojum).

The endgame is a decentralized network of provers (like Succinct, RiscZero) generating aggregated proofs for multiple users and chains. Your device verifies one proof for the entire ecosystem state.

• Cost Amortization: Splits prover cost across millions of users.
• Cross-Chain Unification: One proof for Ethereum, Arbitrum, Optimism, etc.
• Invisible Security: Verification becomes a background process, like TLS in browsers.

Current rollups and L2s rely on centralized sequencers for state validation, creating a single point of censorship and failure. Users must trust the sequencer's output as final, forfeiting agency.

• Vulnerability: A malicious or compromised sequencer can steal funds or censor transactions.
• Cost: Users pay rent to this trusted third party for security they don't control.
• Example: A sequencer outage halts a chain with $10B+ TVL, proving systemic fragility.

Move proof verification logic into the user's wallet or light client. Every transaction's validity is cryptographically proven locally before acceptance, eliminating trusted intermediaries.

• Agency: Users cryptographically verify state transitions, not a sequencer's word.
• Security Model: Shifts from social consensus (trust) to cryptographic consensus (verify).
• Parallel: Inspired by Bitcoin's full node model, but for complex smart contract states.

On-device verification requires significant local compute. The key challenge is optimizing proof systems (like zk-SNARKs, zk-STARKs) for consumer devices without compromising security.

• Constraint: Proof generation/verification must run in ~500ms on a mobile phone.
• Innovation Frontier: Projects like RISC Zero, Succinct Labs are building specialized provers and lighter verification circuits.
• Metric: Success is measured in verification gas cost on-chain and local CPU cycles.

The infrastructure for lightweight, universal proof verification will become the most valuable middleware stack. This is the TLS/SSL moment for Web3.

• Market: Every wallet, dApp, and cross-chain bridge (LayerZero, Axelar) will need this client.
• Moats: Standards for proof formats and verification libraries will create powerful network effects.
• Analogy: Like Cloudflare for web security, but decentralized and user-controlled.

The end-state isn't more monolithic L2s, but a network of specialized provers and a ubiquitous verification client. Execution and settlement separate from verification.

• Future Stack: Specialized coprocessors (EigenLayer AVS, Brevis) generate proofs; a standard client verifies them.
• Interoperability: A single, locally-verified proof can bridge assets across Ethereum, Solana, and Bitcoin.
• Result: True composability without new trust assumptions.

On-device verification enables wallets that cannot be front-run or censored by any external entity. This unlocks the full potential of intent-based architectures (like UniswapX, CowSwap).

• User Experience: Submit a signed intent; your device verifies the fulfillment proof before releasing funds.
• Security: No more MEV extraction by centralized sequencers; the user's client validates optimal execution.
• Primitive: The 'verifying wallet' becomes the atomic unit of user sovereignty.