Here is a section from the Lightspeed publication. To read stout editions, subscribe.
When Anza’s lead economist Max Resnick came on Lightspeed recently, I asked him a quiz that often will get introduced up in conversations about Solana’s economics: What desires to be done about the sandwich assault scenario?
His reply bowled over me. “The sandwiching price [is] manner down,” Resnick stated.
Solana’s sprint makes it an ultimate venue for timing games on the expense of unsophisticated users. A sandwich assault occurs when a poisonous market participant both frontruns and backruns a commerce to earnings on the expense of the dealer.
Sandwiching has historically been a huge scenario for Solana and its builders. In early 2024, Solana infrastructure shop Jito shut down its mempool over sandwiching concerns. A pair months later, the Solana Foundation lower suspected sandwichers from its stake delegation program. Jito’s DAO furthermore voted to blacklist malicious validators from its stake pool.
None of these fixes turned out to be panaceas, alternatively, and the sandwich assaults persevered.
However the yarn Resnick tells is that sandwich attacking used to be blunted no longer by blacklisting foul actors — who can even presumably re-emerge with a definite online id — nonetheless by bettering Solana’s code.
Generally, sandwich assaults are numbers games for the attackers.
In 2024, when landing transactions on Solana used to be a long way more complicated, transactions had been sprayed broadly to validators in hopes of getting user transactions to the blockchain. This supposed poisonous validators saw a range of transactions and had more possibilities to frontrun them. As Solana’s transaction “concentrating on” has improved, fewer validators stare every transaction on common, so sandwichers like fewer alternatives to clutter with transactions, Resnick stated.
