On 7 February, Binens’s founder Changpeng Jhao posted a pole on X seeking whether the BNB series should aggressively reduce the Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) issues.
MeV issues allegedly cost more than $ 1 billion BNB series users in the 2020s. Certainly, more than 80% of users voted to eliminate MeV issues.
What is Mev?
The term refers to the maximum amount of fees withdrawn by a verification of network transactions through rearxing or rearxing the word maximum extractable value block.
This step allows verifications to orchestrate the price change in the market, adjusting the price movements by changing the sequence of orders. For that reason, Mev is sometimes called “invisible tax”.
The problem was first underlined in 2014 when an anonymous reddit user Express Concern over potential front-ringing by miners in Ethereum Network. Long before Defee Bloom, the commentator very clearly explained the possible misuse of the system:
For example, in an Ethereum decentralized stock exchange, I could run a mineral (or several miners) processing exchange transactions. When a large purchase order arrives, I can delay it on all my miners, put a purchase order simultaneously on all my miners, and then process the original transactions. I will get the best price and possibly sell the promoter for immediate profit.
Although the MeV is widely connected to the Etreum Network, the BNB series users faced serious problems with it. As we can see with their votes, they had enough.
There are various manipulations on the platforms of making automated market through bot. One of the most Nastest MEV attacks is called “Sandwich Attack”. The name of the sandwich attack implies to keep a target order between two orders of the bad actor and manipulate the price and close the situation at a more favorable price.
In 2021, BNB chain users reportedly lost about $ 300 million in sandwiches attacks. However, there was a loss of peak Informed In 2024, when a single bot squeezed about $ 40 million in sandwiches attacks within three months, while the total cost of sandwiches attacks was $ 1.5 billion.
The share of the affected blocks reached 35.5%.
Why not end mev issues?
Should BNB Dev Team’s move introduce solutions that limit MEV attackers, or should everything remain the same? There is not a single answer to this question. It is not difficult to understand the concerns over the MeV attacks. These attacks are considered immoral, as evil actor takes advantage of the weakens of the network to get benefits from people who exchange Crypto.
Bots act in an eye blink, and a well -organized automatic trading system can take advantage of mev opportunities at a human not acceptable for a human. Unheard traders will pay for the profits made by someone who is taking advantage of them through automatic trade.
The front running with the front running clash, and the front running in Crypto is still a gray zone. This is not prohibited, as this vulnerability is seen to be contained for decentralized platforms. However, considering the damage scale, by reducing the opportunities of MeV attacks through technological progress, it has been praised by many, and the pole of Zhao has revealed this.
However, many respondents prefer to maintain MeV issues, however? First, many people believe that MEV opportunities lie in very DNAs of decentralized finance, and there is no way to remove them. Others feel the fruits because it is an exploitation, it is not a violation, and as long as MEV is just an opportunity to earn some extra, they do not see the reason for opposing it.
Finally, observers argue that the opportunity for MeV attacks encourage more verifications. This, in turn, promotes decentralization and makes the network safe for all.
Generally, the “mev issues” are the pay paying values to use decentralized finance locations.
This approach ignores the similarity between such a Mev trick such as bandit attack and notorious 51% attack, which is very contrast of decentralization and safety for all.
What are possible solutions?
Zhao itself believes that mev-related problems cannot be “completely”, but there are ways to reduce losses.
One of the devices that help fight against the MeV attacks are called distance process calls. RPC makes direct transactions to a private memool, making it difficult for bad actors to deploy sandwiches attacks.
Another solution that has been in functions since 2023. The so-called proposer-bird-distribution (PBS) model outsources block proposals for different actors who prepare blocks for verifications who choose the most attractive options, but cannot exploit them. Increasing the number of relay of BNB series can be another way to limit the effects of MEV attacks.
Given that the tasks already have several solution projects and the amount of funds made through the MeV attacks, the high support for the MeV deficiency is not amazing.
