Technical Innovations and Challenges of the Sub-second MPC Network Ika

Overview and Positioning of the Ika Network

The Ika network is an innovative infrastructure based on multi-party secure computing ( MPC ) technology, strategically supported by the Sui Foundation. Its most notable feature is sub-second response speed, which is a first in MPC solutions. Ika is highly compatible with the underlying design concepts of parallel processing and decentralized architecture of the Sui blockchain, and will be directly integrated into the Sui development ecosystem in the future, providing plug-and-play cross-chain security modules for Sui Move smart contracts.

Ika is building a new type of security validation layer: serving both as a dedicated signature protocol for the Sui ecosystem and providing standardized cross-chain solutions for the entire industry. Its layered design balances protocol flexibility with development convenience, and it is expected to become an important practical case for the large-scale application of MPC technology in multi-chain scenarios.

Core Technology Analysis

The technical implementation of the Ika network revolves around high-performance distributed signatures, with key innovations including:

1. 2PC-MPC Signature Protocol: An improved two-party MPC solution that decomposes the user private key signing operation into a process involving both the "user" and the "Ika network".

2. Parallel Processing: Utilize parallel computing to decompose a single signing operation into multiple concurrent subtasks, significantly improving speed in conjunction with Sui's object parallel model.

3. Large-scale node network: Supports thousands of nodes participating in signing, with each node holding only a part of the key fragment.

4. Cross-chain control and chain abstraction: Allow smart contracts on other chains to directly control accounts in the Ika network (dWallet).

The potential impact of Ika on the Sui ecosystem

1. Bring cross-chain interoperability to Sui, supporting on-chain assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum to access the Sui network with low latency and high security.

2. Provide a decentralized asset custody mechanism that is more flexible and secure than traditional centralized custody solutions.

3. Simplify the cross-chain interaction process, allowing smart contracts on Sui to directly operate accounts and assets on other chains.

4. Provide a multi-party verification mechanism for AI automated applications to enhance the security and credibility of AI executing transactions.

Challenges faced by Ika

1. Market Competition: It is necessary to find a balance between "decentralization" and "performance" to attract more developers and asset integration.

2. Limitations of MPC technology: Difficulties in revoking signature permissions, and the node replacement mechanism is not yet完善.

3. Network Dependence: Dependence on the stability of the Sui network and its own network conditions, requiring adaptation to Sui upgrades.

4. Consensus Model Risk: Although the Mysticeti consensus supports high concurrency and low fees, it may increase network complexity, leading to new ordering and consensus security issues.

Comparison of Privacy Computing Technologies: FHE, TEE, ZKP, and MPC

Technical Overview

• Fully Homomorphic Encryption ( FHE ): Allows arbitrary computations to be performed on encrypted data, theoretically computation complete but with extremely high overhead.

• Trusted Execution Environment ( TEE ): Utilizes trusted hardware modules to provide an isolated secure execution environment, with performance close to native computing.

• Multi-Party Secure Computation ( MPC ): Multiple parties jointly compute function outputs without revealing private inputs, with no single point of trust, but with high communication overhead.

• Zero-Knowledge Proof ( ZKP ): Allows the verifier to confirm a statement is true without obtaining any additional information.

Application Scenario Comparison

1. Cross-chain signature:

   • MPC is more practical, such as the 2PC-MPC parallel signing of the Ika network.
   • TEE can quickly complete signatures, but there is a risk of hardware trust.
   • The FHE theory is feasible but has excessive costs, with few practical applications.

2. DeFi Multisignature and Custody:

   • Mainstream MPC, such as distributed signature solutions from Fireblocks and Ika.
   • TEE is used for hardware wallets or cloud wallets, but there are hardware trust issues.
   • FHE is mainly used to protect transaction details and contract logic, and has little to do with private key custody.

3. AI and Data Privacy:

   • The advantages of FHE are obvious, allowing for fully encrypted computation.
   • MPC is suitable for collaborative learning, but there are communication bottlenecks when multiple parties participate.
   • TEE can run models directly in a protected environment, but is subject to memory limitations and side-channel attack risks.

Plan Differences

1. Performance and Latency: FHE > ZKP > MPC > TEE ( from high to low )

2. Trust Assumption: FHE/ZKP ( Mathematical Problems ) > MPC ( Participant Behavior ) > TEE ( Hardware Trust )

3. Scalability: ZKP/MPC > FHE/TEE

4. Integration Difficulty: TEE < MPC < ZKP/FHE

Market Perspectives and Future Outlook

• FHE is not superior to TEE, MPC, or ZKP in all aspects; each technology has its advantages and limitations.

The future of privacy computing may be a combination and integration of various technologies, rather than a single solution prevailing.

• Modular solutions will become a trend, such as Nillion integrating various privacy technologies to enhance overall capabilities.

• The selection of the appropriate technology combination should be based on specific application requirements and performance trade-offs; there is no "one-size-fits-all" optimal solution.