Why does a valid signature on one chain still authorize a transfer on another?
κΈ°ν
Cross-chain bridges sign messages to authorize transfers, but most protocols do not include the destination chain ID or action type inside the signed payload itself. An attacker who sees a legitimate signed message can broadcast it to a different chain or replay it as a different action, and the receiving contract cannot distinguish the replay from a fresh authorization. The CrossCurve bridge lost $3M in February 2026 this way, and replay-class bridge incidents have totaled over $180M with a median six-week window from deployment to first exploit. ERC-7281 standardizes cross-chain token interfaces but does not mandate domain-separated signing across the broader message layer. No enforced standard today requires that every signed cross-chain payload carry a chain ID and action-type commitment that makes re-broadcasting structurally invalid.
μ μ€μνκ°
Domain-separated signing is the missing primitive that makes a signed cross-chain message valid exactly once on exactly one chain.
κΈ°ν νκ° λ°©μ
κΈ°ν μ μλ μΈ‘μ κ°μ΄ μλ μ μ£Όκ΄μ νκ°μ λλ€. μΌλ§λ λΆνΈνμ§, μΌλ§λ μμ£Ό λ°μνλμ§, νμ¬ ν΄κ²°μ± μ΄ μΌλ§λ λΆμ‘±νμ§λ₯Ό λ°μν©λλ€. μ μκ° λμμλ‘ λ§λ€ κ°μΉκ° λ λλ€κ³ μκ°ν©λλ€.
λ°μνμ λ μΌλ§λ ν° λΆνΈμ μ΄λνλμ§.
μ€μ λ‘ μΌλ§λ μμ£Ό μ νκ² λλμ§.
νμ¬ μ΄λ₯Ό ν΄κ²°ν λ§ν λκ΅¬κ° μΌλ§λ λΆμ‘±νμ§.
ν΄κ²°ν κ°μΉ μλ λ λ§μ λ¬Έμ λ€
μμ‘μ 곡κ°νμ§ μκ³ μ§κΈ λ₯λ ₯μ μ¦λͺ ν μ μλ μ΄μ λ 무μμΌκΉ?
Blockchainμ²΄μΈ κ° μκΈ μ΄λμ΄ μ΄κΈ° μΈν°λ·λ³΄λ€ μμ§λ λ 무μμ΄ μ΄μ λ 무μμΌκΉ?
Blockchainκ·μ μ€μκ° μμ§λ PDF ν μ₯κ³Ό κΈ°λμ μμ‘΄νλ μ΄μ λ 무μμΌκΉ?
Blockchainμ μ ν 컀μ€ν°λλ μ¬μ ν ν€λ₯Ό μμ΄λ²λ¦¬κ±°λ νμ¬λ₯Ό μ λ’°νλ κ² μ¬μ΄μ μ νμΈκ°?
Blockchainμ€λ¬Ό μμ°μ ν ν°ννλ λ° μ μμ§λ μ€κ°μΈμ΄ μ΄ λͺ μ©μ΄λ νμν κΉμ?
Blockchainμ€ν μ΄λΈμ½μΈμ μ μΈν°λ· μμ΄ κ²°μ ν μ μμκΉμ?