Shared security protocols are positioning themselves as solutions to infrastructure challenges that have complicated institutional blockchain adoption due to unified security layers’ potential ability to reduce development costs and technical barriers for enterprises.
According to Symbiotic CEO Misha Putiatin, the shared security model allows organizations to leverage existing blockchain security infrastructure rather than building custom systems.
Shared security consists of a unified layer where users stake assets, and multiple applications can build upon that security-focused infrastructure. This structure enables institutions to address development timelines and allocate resources effectively.
In an interview with CryptoSlate, Putiatin described the value proposition as immediate scalability through reusable security primitives.
Organizations can utilize existing operator sets and benefit from established infrastructure rather than developing systems independently over multiple years.
Traditional cross-chain verification has presented enterprises with limited options, each carrying distinct trade-offs.
Trusted messenger systems require allowlisting specific authorities and relying on off-chain agreements, while light client implementations demand extensive development resources and ongoing maintenance.
Shared security protocols aim to provide a middle ground by enabling the verification of consensus results across multiple blockchain ecosystems.
This approach could support various enterprise applications, including liquidity protocols, cross-chain bridges, and oracle systems, without requiring separate verification infrastructure for each blockchain.
The unified model creates native connectivity between supported blockchains, potentially simplifying multi-chain deployment for institutions exploring blockchain integration strategies.
Shared security implementations face scrutiny regarding centralization risks, as unified layers could theoretically create single points of failure affecting multiple connected networks. Different protocols address these concerns through varying architectural approaches.
Putiatin noted that some implementations maintain network autonomy by allowing individual blockchain projects to control their validator selection, staking mechanisms, and governance parameters. This modular approach aims to preserve network independence while providing shared infrastructure benefits.
Upgrade mechanisms also vary, with some protocols implementing opt-in systems where networks choose whether to adopt new features rather than facing mandatory updates that could affect their operations.
Financial institutions have adopted a mixed approach to blockchain implementation. They deploy applications on existing public networks while exploring custom blockchain development.
The choice often depends on regulatory requirements, compliance needs, and technical specifications. Shared security protocols target institutions seeking middle-ground solutions that provide customization capabilities without full development overhead.
This approach may appeal to organizations that require specific compliance features or governance structures while allowing for extensive in-house blockchain development.
However, institutional blockchain adoption patterns remain unclear as regulatory frameworks evolve and best practices for enterprise blockchain implementation are still developing across different industries and use cases.
Putiatin concluded that the effectiveness of unified security layers in driving institutional adoption will likely depend on their ability to balance customization needs with the benefits of standardization.
