In the consensus systems of blockchain technologies, various protocols have been developed to distribute validation power among participants, enabling high decentralization and security. Protocols such as Bitcoin, Algorand, or Ouroboros Praos allow participants to directly engage in the network with the resources they have available. In these systems, block producers can group into pools, where a leader is responsible for validating and organizing blocks while members work to solve algorithms or contribute their stake. This dynamic responds to economic incentives and the tendency to prefer frequent payments over large but unlikely or distant ones.
Other projects like Cosmos and EOS impose certain restrictions and require participants to delegate their resources to validator nodes. In these cases, users without sufficient direct stake must transfer their validation rights to representatives they trust. The selection of validators is carried out through voting mechanisms based on delegated resources. Thus, each epoch involves the formation of committees responsible for executing the protocol.
In all these systems, there are two types of key resources: computational or staking power (such as stake) and delegation capacity, which includes decision-making over block content. These are managed by miners, stakeholders, pool leaders, and delegates, who control their use. The security of the chain is guaranteed when the majority of total power is in the hands of honest actors. However, if this power becomes too concentrated, it can affect the stability, liveness, and trust in the system.
The role of the block proposer has become more complex over time. Originally, a single actor proposed and built blocks, but this role has been split into proposers and builders, especially in Proof of Work (PoW) blockchains, where the pool leader selects transactions while members execute the algorithm. This separation introduced risks: transaction censorship, loss of rewards for members, and exposure of personal data.
Furthermore, with the advent of smart contracts, MEV (Maximal Extractable Value) attacks emerged, where block builders exploit their position to alter the order of transactions for their benefit. In response, the PBS (Proposer-Builder Separation) model has been proposed, whereby a trusted proposer defines a block without validators seeing its content. However, its usefulness remains debated due to risks of censorship and centralization.
Another critical point is resistance to temporal attacks. In PoW, if a hostile majority takes control, honest users can still recover the system by increasing their power over time. But in PoS, power is transferred within the ledger, enabling a malicious majority to prevent the redistribution of power, maintaining control indefinitely. Therefore, a diverse distribution of stake is essential to prevent centralized takeovers and avoid vulnerabilities in the system.
In this context of technological evolution, at Q2BSTUDIO we specialize in the development and design of technological solutions that drive decentralization and security in blockchain architectures. Thanks to our experience in software, distributed networks, and crypto economics, we support companies and organizations in building resilient infrastructures oriented towards transparency and ease of governance. From developing secure and efficient APIs to evaluating consensus models, we help integrate cutting-edge blockchain technologies with a pragmatic and strategic approach.
