Hello, I have questions:
ICP has successfully integrated with the Bitcoin network, enabling direct use of native BTC on the ICP blockchain, and directly communicate between two networks. However, why do ICP wallets and decentralized exchanges still prefer using ckBTC instead of native BTC for transactions? What are the specific technical challenges or limitations that hinder the widespread use of native BTC in ICP’s DeFi ecosystem?
I think Native BTC can be used on the Internet Computer Protocol due to its Bitcoin integration via threshold ECDSA cryptography. Including:
1.Direct Transfers**: ICP canisters can send and receive native BTC without needing a middle layer or wrapped tokens like ckBTC. For example, a user could send BTC from their Bitcoin wallet directly to an ICP canister for a specific use (e.g., payments, storage), and the canister can interact directly with the Bitcoin blockchain.
2.Cross-chain Operations: Developers can now create trustless BTC transactions that involve ICP canisters directly interacting with the Bitcoin network. This means that ICP smart contracts can execute functions like native BTC transfers in a secure and decentralized way.
3.dApps Utilizing Native BTC: A dApp could allow users to engage in lending, borrowing, or staking of native BTC using ICP smart contracts, eliminating the need for conversions into wrapped tokens.
Could you tell me any thoughts mentioned are right?
Thanks a lot!
Hi @TQZHU I just joined the forum to reply to your post!
I am the founder of SeedCard - a Bitcoin key card project. I am keen to understand more about BTC integration with ICP and have been advised that ICP canisters could be a solution to build the functionality needed for our project.
All your points touch on what we need!
I hope that some devs will reply to this post and I am happy to share details about SeedCard. I believe it could be an interesting usecase for BTC integration
short answer: yes, you can do anything you described with the Bitcoin integration.
ckBTC is just one possible solution where the canister still controls the Bitcoin UTXOs and mints/burns ckBTC on deposit/withdraw.
anybody could build sth. similar to that. for many dapps on ICP it makes sense to just utilize ckBTC for simplicity and convenience. why reinvent the wheel if not needed?
a canister can also control UTXOs without exposing any information at all and without minting a “wrapped” version. recently I started a discussion about that because I think it would be great to have a standard that allows canisters to proof that they control a specific address on other networks, see Standard to expose verifiable TVL of assets secured by ICP (Chain Fusion)
Thank you for your reply.
One more question:
I know that when Dfinity has set up threshed ECDSA and key resharing mechanisms for secure solutions, and node providers have been identified and signed a declaration of good faith. Apart from all these, is there any methods to convince the BTC og to come and transfer the assets regards the ckBTC node subnet 28 nodes issue is concerned?
Is it possible to use the following methods?
As per Approach to analyzing risk | Bitcoin Layers, when net operators set > 100, the BTC layer2 networks can be evaluated as low risk. On a cost acceptable basis , expanding the current ckBTC canister subnet with 28 nodes in to more than 100.
Designing an emergency escape plan for unlocking the UTXOs for BTC hosting canister?
Thanks!
well, I think you will never convince some BTC og’s to move funds over to ICP. at least not a significant amount. still it makes a lot of sense to tell them to check ckBTC out as a potential alternative to lightning network and for using BTC in payment systems. ICP makes BTC programmable, this is awesome
my personal indicator for trust in ICP’s threshold ECDSA signatures is the total TVL of BTC secured through it (beyond ckBTC)
I am not sure how far we can go, but recently the subnet was expanded from 28 nodes to 34 nodes. the change was already recognized and updated by the Bitcoin Layers team.
This is the main reason for my interest in ICP to be honest. I am currently working on a usecase that leverage the direct control and monitoring of BTC wallets. I will share the project brief when it is complete.
Excited to get feed back from the devs in this forum (@TQZHU )
So heres a link to the project brief. This is my first time looking at ways to integrate smart contracts with the BTC blockchain. I hope the doc is useful to start a conversation on how my usecase could work - (i dont seem to be able to share the link)
