Author: Shenchao TechFlow
DeepChain Summary: A public academic patent dispute has erupted over the underlying technology of chain abstraction. Dominic Williams, founder of the DFINITY Foundation, has published a post accusing NEAR Protocol of improperly using his threshold ECDSA algorithm.
Meanwhile, Williams questioned the level of decentralization of NEAR's nodes and cited codebase records to highlight technical concerns. Currently, these statements constitute unilateral allegations, as NEAR has not publicly responded, prompting the industry to broadly examine the boundaries of commercializing open-source cryptography.
Academic Achievements and Former Employees: The Full Story of the Threshold Signature Algorithm Infringement Claim
In decentralized account abstraction, threshold signatures form the foundational layer for cross-chain asset allocation. Williams noted that NEAR’s chain abstraction components directly reuse the core algorithm published by DFINITY in its 2022 academic paper.
According to its description, this threshold ECDSA algorithm features highly optimized mathematical efficiency, tripling the signing speed of distributed nodes compared to conventional solutions. In intent routing, where second-level confirmation is critical, this speed advantage directly impacts user experience.
The disagreement centers on technical licensing. Williams emphasized that the commercial license for this algorithm is strictly limited to the Internet Computer ecosystem and has not been extended to external competing networks.
On the personnel front, Williams accused NEAR of hiring former employees dismissed by DFINITY in 2021 to lead signature research and development. This incident elevates an academic discussion into a serious legal dispute involving non-compete restrictions and intellectual property.
Williams stated that DFINITY did not refuse to share technology. Had NEAR proactively sought formal collaboration and acknowledged the academic source in advance, the team would have been willing to reach a licensing agreement under a fair framework; the direct porting violated the baseline of ecological trust.
Questioning of node count and architecture downgrade: 8 servers and 3-round signature controversy
In addition to the patent algorithm allegations, Williams also challenged the degree of decentralization underlying NEAR’s chain abstraction. He publicly pointed out that NEAR’s multi-party computation (MPC) network is deployed on only eight servers, raising questions about its overall fault tolerance.
For comparison, Williams emphasizes that the threshold signature network of Internet Computer consists of approximately 50 independent node entities worldwide. This scalable subnet architecture features a robust Byzantine fault tolerance mechanism sufficient to maintain stable consensus even in the event of node failures.
At the engineering implementation level, Williams cited public records from the NEAR official codebase, referencing the pull request (PR #4503) and issue discussion (Issue #4324) for the MPC codebase to highlight the technical challenges it faces.
Records show that the NEAR engineering team is attempting to transition from a one-round communication signature scheme to a more time-consuming three-round signature scheme. Williams believes this engineering change reflects that the original implementation encountered security vulnerabilities or deadlocks, forcing a downgrade in efficiency.
The competition in the chain abstraction space is intensifying: a battle over open-source academic boundaries and infrastructure foundations
This turmoil reflects the intense competition in the public chain space over chain abstraction and cross-chain intent. As the multi-chain landscape continues to fragment, whoever can provide faster, more secure underlying cross-chain signing will hold the dominant position in unifying on-chain access.
In the context of blockchain development, the boundary between academic papers and open-source code has long been blurred. Some teams treat published papers as a public knowledge base, but in cases involving proprietary commercial licensing, academic papers do not equate to免责 open-source licenses.
It should be noted that the details of the allegations disclosed on social media come solely from DFINITY’s statements. NEAR has not yet issued an official announcement or provided clarification regarding intellectual property, and the codebase adjustments await independent analysis by professional security organizations.
As competition over cross-chain intent intensifies, the infrastructure landscape is evolving from mere technical exchange to a more serious phase of regulatory scrutiny and patent validation. This signature dispute will undoubtedly provide profound insights into industry standards for technical attribution and team non-compete management.