You might have read in the newspaper lately that $615 million in cryptocurrency was stolen, and that it was related to the popular mobile game Axie Infinity. Beyond these facts, I think it has been a little murky in the coverage just what happened and how it happened to what players. Broadly, "decentralization" is a hot buzzword and while this heist is in the news it might provide a good idea to examine what sort of decentralization existed around Axie Infinity (or not) and whether it provided any real value (or not).
Axie Infinity is a Pokemon-like game that rewards players with cryptocurrency and then the Pokemon-like creatures themselves are non-fungible tokens (NFTs). It is published by a company called Sky Mavis, and this company in turn created a blockchain network called Ronin to handle the activity generated by the game. Ronin is an example of what is called an L2 network, a blockchain network intended to handle the traffic volume of some particular constituency in some specific way. Usually the goal of these L2 networks is greater efficiency and lower cost - perhaps the end user has heard of the Ethereum blockchain and wants to hold Ether for their efforts, yet it would be prohibitively expensive to send all the transactions generated by the game (which lives in regular old-school centralized web infrastructure) directly to the Ethereum blockchain. The L2 network, in our example the Ronin Network, processes the transactions from the game and then sends the information in a condensed form to the Ethereum blockchain via a smart contract called a bridge.
In the recent heist, the cryptocurrency was actually stolen from the Ronin Network via this bridge. Some of the small failures around why this was possible are notable: while Ethereum has a battle-tested global network with multitudes of nodes, the Ronin Network had only 9 nodes with 4 of the 9 operated by Sky Mavis itself. (There is an interesting digression here about how decentralization is in practice quite easy to fake.) Worse, it appears that corners were cut in developing Ronin, as the exploit involved a "gas-free RPC node" they had been using to work on development issues. I don't have space here to unpack that phrase, but I am guessing that readers who recognize these words don't think they are good cybersecurity practice.
To zoom out and see the big picture, Sky Mavis was in a good position to drape themselves in the decentralized cache of the Ethereum blockchain and they did, but maybe this was a little disingenuous. Much of the real action was on the Ronin Network, which in turn had some of the decentralized smell on it, but then in the end it was maybe a bit too much of a Sky Mavis -first jam to really deserve that word. Sky Mavis being able to make a bad decision behind close doors and lose your money is not what decentralization in crypto is supposed to be about.
So... there was an appealing looking decentralized cargo cult but maybe not meaningful decentralization of the full stack... and it went bad in ways true decentralization is supposed to prevent...
