Buterin and Yakovenko Clash Over Ethereum L2 Security

27th October 2025 – A public debate between Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin and Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko has reignited discussions around the security of Ethereum’s layer-2 (L2) networks. Their opposing viewpoints have raised questions about whether L2 solutions genuinely inherit the robust security guarantees of Ethereum’s base layer.

Buterin: L2s Inherit Base Layer Security

In a recent post on X, Vitalik Buterin defended Ethereum’s L2 security model. He argued that major L2 networks—such as Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, and Worldchain – derive finality and resistance to 51% attacks directly from Ethereum’s base layer.

“A key property of a blockchain is that even a 51% attack cannot make an invalid block valid,” Buterin wrote. “This means even 51% of validators colluding (or hit by a software bug) cannot steal your assets.”

However, he also pointed out the limits of that security. If validator sets are entrusted with tasks that the chain itself does not control, those guarantees may break down.

“At that point, 51% of validators can collude and give a wrong answer, and you don’t have any recourse,” he added.

Proponents of Ethereum’s L2 architecture highlight the strength of its validator base, which includes over one million active participants, vastly outnumbering Solana’s approximately 2,000 validators. This validator scale, they argue, increases resistance to coordinated attacks.

Yakovenko: L2 Security Assumptions Are Flawed

Solana co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko directly disputed Buterin’s claims. In his view, the belief that Ethereum L2s inherit full security from the base chain is incorrect.

“The claim that L2s inherit Ethereum security is erroneous,” Yakovenko posted on X. “Five years into the L2 roadmap, wormhole ETH on Solana has the same worst-case risks as ETH on Base – and generates as much revenue for Ethereum L1 stakers.”

Yakovenko questioned whether persistent limitations stem from fundamental issues with L2 design. He dismissed the notion that delays in achieving full security are due to incompetence among L2 teams.

He outlined three major vulnerabilities:

1. Broad Attack Surface: Complex L2 codebases are difficult to audit fully, increasing exposure to exploits.
2. Multi-Signature Risks: Custody mechanisms can allow funds to move without user consent if signers are compromised.
3. Centralization Risks: Off-chain processes shift control to a few actors, undermining decentralization.

Buterin Vs Yakovenko

A New Bridge Proposal

To address these concerns, Yakovenko proposed building a dedicated Ethereum-Solana bridge that positions Ethereum as a layer-2 on Solana. He believes such a solution could enable secure asset transfers between the ecosystems while avoiding current L2 shortcomings.

As Ethereum and Solana continue to scale, their respective strategies for decentralization, security, and interoperability are becoming increasingly divergent, setting the stage for ongoing debate within the blockchain community.

The Talk

Real voices. Real reactions.

KOLsMediaCommunity

@0xMert_ @aeyakovenko @ppat_throwaway @zksync @MetaLeX_Labs I don't think a corporate multisig is more secure than Solana's or Ethereum's L1 validator set lol some other L1s, probably yes if we're talking about ZKsync multi-BORG + DAO setup vs their validator set

"@aeyakovenko @lex_node @ppat_throwaway @zksync @MetaLeX_Labs why are you giving attention to someone who thinks a corporate multisig is more secure than an L1 validator set? it is either bad faith or pure mathematical retardation since every single one of those validator keys on Solana can also be multisigs like theres 0 argument It's"— @

_gabrielShapir0

@lex_node

about 15 hours ago

@VitalikButerin Two quick comments: First, a key property of any blockchain is that a 51% attack (and partial synchrony) will break either safety or liveness, and ideally it should not break both. More on this tradeoff here: https://t.co/bWxpCpW6ML

"Regular reminder: A key property of a blockchain is that even a 51% attack *cannot make an invalid block valid*. This means even 51% of validators colluding (or hit by a software bug) cannot steal your assets. However, this property does not carry over if you start trusting"— @

Ittai Abraham

@ittaia

about 24 hours ago

@VitalikButerin “this property does not carry over if you start trusting your validator set to do other things, that the chain does not have control over” are you referring to EigenLayer？

"Regular reminder: A key property of a blockchain is that even a 51% attack *cannot make an invalid block valid*. This means even 51% of validators colluding (or hit by a software bug) cannot steal your assets. However, this property does not carry over if you start trusting"— @

陈剑Jason

@jason_chen998

1 day ago

Do you want to read and know more about Altcoins? Check out our Altcoin Arena for sentiment analysis, latest updates, community reactions, price predictions and project reviews on the best altcoins in crypto.