Tracking: state unification, removal of confidential assets

[dr-orlovsky]

affects: 0.11.0-beta.9
status: wip
breaks: [ rgb-core, rgb-std, rgb-wallet, rgb-schemata, rgb-interfaces ]

Goals

• Remove Pedersen commitments and bulleproofs
• Unify all types of owned state (structured, fungible, attachments, rights)
• Remove state concealements

Proposals

• WIP

Issues

n/a

Pull requests

• State unification with removal of Pedersen commitments and bulletproofs rgb-core#279
• State unification with removal of Pedersen commitments and bulletproofs rgb-std#279
• State unification with removal of Pedersen commitments and bulletproofs #262
• State unification rgb-interfaces#15
• State unification rgb-schemata#50
• TBD in rgb-tests

[crisdut]

Hi @dr-orlovsky,

Does this change have implications for Liquid support?

Thanks

[dr-orlovsky]

We have added AssetTag because we had Confidential assets, which require its presence (as was explained to me by Adam Back in Oct 2023). A side-effect of that was ability to have trustless third-party bridges with Liquid assets (what you called "Liquid compatibility"), so when we bring an asset from Liquid to RGB it can trustlessly verify it's previous liquid history.

Now, if we remove Confidential assets from RGB, we remove (temporary) ability to do trustless third-party asset bridges from Liquid. I am saying "temporary", since theoretically you can implement CA right in AluVM and that feature would be back - except that this would require quite a lot of work and won't happen soon.

Nevertheless, this is not the same as "removing all of Liquid compatibility", since we still can:

• run RGB contracts on Liquid blockchain;
• move assets in RGB between Bitcoin and Liquid blockchains;
• use RGB lightning on top of Liquid;
• issuers can issue their assets right into RGB on Liquid (burning confidential liquid assets, if needed);
• third-parties (to users and issuers) can do a trusted asset bridges.

So the only think which is lost with this epic is trustless third-party asset bridges with Liquid - but it can be recovered in a backward-compatible way if some is willing to invest sufficient time into developing native AluVM-based CA trustless bridge.

[crisdut]

* move assets in RGB between Bitcoin and Liquid blockchains;

Atomic swap, for example?

So the only think which is lost with this epic is trustless third-party asset bridges with Liquid - but it can be recovered in a backward-compatible way if some is willing to invest sufficient time into developing native AluVM-based CA trustless bridge.

Ok, sure.

Thanks for explaining!

[dr-orlovsky]

Atomic swap, for example?

Atomic swaps are unrelated to asset tags or confidential assets and can be done before and after the discussed changes

[crisdut]

Atomic swap, for example?

Atomic swaps are unrelated to asset tags or confidential assets and can be done before and after the discussed changes

Yes, yes, I agree with you. I just pointed out one example.