ConsenSys“引導”的零知識匯總聲稱是“最具創新性的 Web3 項目的所在地”，但其最大的項目是 Aave 的一個看似省力的分支

「分叉」在 DeFi 中很常見，是複製現有專案程式碼以進行重複使用以及（理想情況下）進一步開發的做法。

Decentralized finance (DeFi) is littered with ‘forks,’ but rarely do they top the total value locked (TVL) charts. However, Linea, the zero-knowledge rollup ‘bootstrapped’ by Consensys, claims to be ‘home to the most innovative web3 projects.’ But the largest project, ZeroLend, is a seemingly low-effort fork of Aave, the widely-established lending protocol.

去中心化金融（DeFi）充斥著“分叉”，但它們很少能登上總價值鎖定（TVL）排行榜的榜首。然而，由 Consensys 「引導」的零知識匯總 Linea 聲稱自己是「最具創新性的 web3 專案的所在地」。但最大的專案 ZeroLend 是廣泛建立的借貸協議 Aave 的一個看似省力的分支。

As noted by X (formerly Twitter) user @majinsayan, ZeroLend’s mobile site until very recently even redirected to Aave’s own FAQ section.

正如 X（以前的 Twitter）用戶 @majinsayan 所指出的，ZeroLend 的行動網站直到最近甚至還重定向到 Aave 自己的常見問題解答部分。

The biggest protocol on linea (consensys) is a copy-paste aave-fork that forgot to change hotlinks of documentation which still links to aave docsethereum people should shut the fuck up for 30 days and look at the bullshit they're peddling to the worldgo keep a clean house pic.twitter.com/MibgMXppuo

linea（consensys）上最大的協議是一個複製粘貼 aave-fork，它忘記更改仍然鏈接到 aave docsethereum 的文檔熱鏈接，人們應該閉嘴 30 天，看看他們向世界兜售的廢話。 twitter.com/MibgMXppuo

At $235 million TVL, ZeroLend accounts for over a third of the blockchain’s entire $667 million TVL, according to data from DeFiLlama.

根據 DeFiLlama 的數據，ZeroLend 的總鎖定鎖倉量為 2.35 億美元，佔區塊鏈 6.67 億美元總鎖定鎖倉量的三分之一以上。

Forking is the practice of copying an existing project’s code for reuse and, ideally, further development. It is common in DeFi.

分叉是複製現有專案程式碼以供重用以及理想情況下進一步開發的做法。這在 DeFi 中很常見。

Oft-forked Aave is the biggest protocol in DeFi — ignoring Lido and Eigenlayer which offer ETH staking and re-staking, respectively — with $11.6 billion of TVL across 12 chains.

經常分叉的 Aave 是 DeFi 中最大的協議（忽略分別提供 ETH 質押和重新質押的 Lido 和 Eigenlayer），在 12 條鏈上擁有 116 億美元的 TVL。

Many forks of Aave, and similar lending protocol Compound, have been deployed over the years, and have often fallen victim to hackers. Recent examples include Radiant Capital, which lost $4.5 million in January, and Michael Patryn’s UwU Lend, which was hacked for $20 million one month ago.

Aave 的許多分叉以及類似的借貸協議Compound 已經部署多年，並且經常成為駭客的受害者。最近的例子包括Radiant Capital，該公司在1月損失了450萬美元，而Michael Patryn的UwU Lend則在一個月前被駭客攻擊損失了2000萬美元。

Today's hack on @RDNTCapital results in the loss of 1.9k eth (~$4.5m). The root cause is not new: It basically exploits a time window when a new market is activated in a lending market (forked from the popular Compound/Aave). The exploitation also relies on a known rounding… https://t.co/XogWUVO3po pic.twitter.com/x5X9ql8AGA

今天對 @RDNTCapital 的駭客攻擊導致 1900 個 eth（約 450 萬美元）的損失。根本原因並不新鮮：它基本上利用了借貸市場（從流行的Compound/Aave 分叉）中激活新市場的時間窗口。此利用也依賴已知的捨入… https://t.co/XogWUVO3po pic.twitter.com/x5X9ql8AGA

Read more: Sifu’s UwU Lend reportedly hacked for $20M, Curve’s Egorov among affected

閱讀更多：據報導 Sifu 的 UwU Lend 被駭客攻擊價值 2000 萬美元，Curve 的 Egorov 也受到影響

However, the original codebases are widely considered amongst the most secure in the sector, with any changes only possible via decentralized governance and on-chain voting.

然而，原始程式碼庫被廣泛認為是該領域最安全的程式碼庫，任何變更都只能透過去中心化治理和鏈上投票來實現。

While this may be comforting for even the most risk-averse crypto users, such as addresses labeled as the US government, it’s not without its own problems, given that any bug fixes take time to implement.

雖然這可能會讓最厭惡風險的加密用戶（例如標記為美國政府的地址）感到安慰，但考慮到任何錯誤修復都需要時間來實施，它本身也存在問題。

US gov has 20M of stables in Aave? pic.twitter.com/KlSqssX1ra

美國政府在 Aave 擁有 2000 萬個馬厩？ pic.twitter.com/KlSqssX1ra

Read more: Compound Finance upgrade bug freezes $830M in crypto

了解更多：Compound Finance 升級錯誤凍結了 8.3 億美元的加密貨幣

Back in March, Aave governance delegate Marc Zeller described ZeroLend as “the Aave codebase with a high inflation shitcoin slapped on top.”

早在 3 月份，Aave 治理代表 Marc Zeller 將 ZeroLend 描述為「在 Aave 程式碼庫之上加上了高通膨的垃圾幣」。

The comment came in response to ZeroLend’s governance forum post suggesting that Aave recognize them as a ‘friendly fork,’ offering to share revenue and a portion of their ZERO token airdrop in return.

該評論是對 ZeroLend 治理論壇帖子的回應，該帖子建議 Aave 將其視為“友好分叉”，並提出分享收入和部分 ZERO 代幣空投作為回報。

Zeller didn’t seem keen on the reputation risk involved in associating Aave with one of the many unsanctioned spin-offs, however, hazarding that ZeroL🧃lend “only has one likely outcome, onboarding the wrong collateral or Oracle, or pushing a wrong config and getting featured in Rekt News.”

然而，Zeller 似乎並不熱衷於將Aave 與眾多未經批准的衍生產品之一聯繫起來所帶來的聲譽風險，他擔心ZeroL🧃lend「只有一種可能的結果，加入錯誤的抵押品或Oracle，或推送錯誤的配置並出現在 Rekt News 中。

ZeroLend had been seeking a similar setup to MakerDAO’s SparkLend, which has been endorsed by Aave under a similar revenue sharing proposal since it passed in March 2023.

ZeroLend 一直在尋求與 MakerDAO 的 SparkLend 類似的設置，自 2023 年 3 月通過以來，該設置已根據類似的收入分享提案得到了 Aave 的認可。

However, Spark also found itself on Zeller’s radar last week. He accused MakerDAO of ‘creative accounting,’ leading to a revenue share calculation at “much closer to 1%,” rather than the agreed upon 10%.

然而，Spark 上週也引起了 Zeller 的注意。他指責 MakerDAO 的“創造性會計”，導致收入份額計算“非常接近 1%”，而不是商定的 10%。

Zeller is no stranger to inter-DAO controversy, hitting out at Gauntlet and Morpho earlier this year, and criticizing the same pair’s risk management strategy in the wake of Renzo’s ezETH depeg. He then branded as “reckless” MakerDAO’s decision to onboard Ethena’s ‘synthetic dollar’ as collateral.

Zeller 對 DAO 間的爭議並不陌生，他在今年早些時候猛烈抨擊了 Gauntlet 和 Morpho，並在 Renzo 的 ezETH 脫鉤之後批評了同一對的風險管理策略。隨後，他將 MakerDAO 使用 Ethena 的「合成美元」作為抵押品的決定稱為「魯莽」。

Got a tip? Send us an email or ProtonMail. For more informed news, follow us on X, Instagram, Bluesky, and Google News, or

有小費嗎？給我們發送電子郵件或 ProtonMail。想了解更多消息靈通的新聞，請在 X、Instagram、Bluesky 和 ​​Google News 上關注我們，或者