Zcash Developers Recommend Upgrading Nodes to Ironwood Fork

cryptonews.ruОпубліковано о 2026-07-27Востаннє оновлено о 2026-07-27

Анотація

The Zcash Foundation has released Zebra 6.0.0 and recommends all node operators upgrade to the Ironwood fork. This update introduces a new shielded pool and version 6 transaction format. The change was prompted by a vulnerability discovered in the old Orchard pool that could have allowed an attacker to create counterfeit $ZEC undetected. Developers patched the vulnerability in June, finding no evidence of exploitation, though Zcash's privacy architecture prevents absolute certainty. Ironwood utilizes the Orchard action structure and Halo2 proof system. It adds a separate note commitment tree, a nullifier set, a network value pool, and network history data. After activation, nodes can track the new pool independently from Orchard. Zebra also updates node commands for operators to verify pool and commitment tree states. This upgrade is critical, as older software will not follow the correct chain post-activation. Ironwood's key protection mechanism is a "turnstile" between the Orchard and new pools. Once activated, Orchard will stop accepting new outputs and internal transfers. Funds can be withdrawn, but an accounting rule prevents withdrawing more $ZEC from Orchard than was legitimately deposited. This design allows public auditing of the circulating supply without revealing private balances or transaction details, with any excess capital becoming locked inside Orchard. Zcash had scheduled this hardfork for July 28 after developers confirmed the patched bug raised inflation...

The Zcash Foundation developers have released Zebra 6.0.0 and recommended all node operators upgrade to the fork. The update includes a new shielded pool and transaction format v6.

Its release is related to a vulnerability discovered in the old Orchard pool, which could have allowed an attacker to covertly create counterfeit $ZEC.

The developers addressed the vulnerability with emergency patches in June. At the same time, they did not find any evidence of the vulnerability being exploited, but Zcash's privacy architecture does not allow them to state this with complete certainty.

According to the Zebra 6.0.0 release notes, Ironwood uses the Orchard action structure and the Halo2 proof system. It also adds a separate note commitment tree, a set of nullifiers, a network value pool, and network history data. Once activated, these records allow nodes to track the new pool independently of Orchard.

Zebra also updates several node commands so operators can check the state of the pool and the commitment tree. On GitHub, this update is marked as critical for operators because the old software will not follow the correct network after the activation height is reached.

The primary supply protection mechanism of Ironwood is a kind of "turnstile" between Orchard and the new pool. After activation, Orchard will stop accepting new outputs and internal transfers. Funds can be withdrawn, but a value accounting rule prevents withdrawing more $ZEC from Orchard than was legitimately added to it.

The Ironwood design description notes that this mechanism provides users with public oversight over the circulating supply without revealing private balances or transaction details. After withdrawals, any excess capital will remain locked inside Orchard.

As Happy Coin News previously reported, Zcash scheduled the hard fork for July 28 after developers confirmed the fixed bug raised doubts about supply inflation.

end-content

Пов'язані питання

QWhy did the developers of Zcash release Zebra 6.0.0?

AThe developers of Zcash Foundation released Zebra 6.0.0 to address a vulnerability in the old Orchard pool that could have allowed an attacker to create counterfeit $ZEC, and to prepare for the Ironwood fork which introduces a new secure pool and v6 transaction format.

QWhat is the main security mechanism introduced by the Ironwood fork?

AThe main security mechanism introduced by the Ironwood fork is a 'turnstile' between the old Orchard pool and the new secure pool. After activation, Orchard will stop accepting new outputs and shielded transactions, and funds can only be withdrawn up to the amount legitimately deposited, preventing the creation of counterfeit coins.

QWhat does the Zebra 6.0.0 update enable node operators to do?

AThe Zebra 6.0.0 update enables node operators to check the state of the new secure pool and the commitment tree, ensuring they can track the new pool independently of the old Orchard pool.

QWhat key technology does the Ironwood fork utilize?

AThe Ironwood fork utilizes the Orchard action structure and the Halo2 proof system. It also adds a separate spending commitment tree, a set of nullifiers, a network value pool, and network history data.

QWhen is the Zcash hard fork scheduled to occur?

AAccording to the article, the Zcash hard fork is scheduled for July 28.

Пов'язані матеріали

Take a Calm Look at Domestic Lithography Machines: 5 Units Delivered, How Far Are We from Challenging ASML?

This article analyzes recent news about China's domestic DUV lithography machines, advising a measured perspective. A state-backed enterprise plans to deliver about 5 immersion DUV systems this year, with a 2027 target of 20 units, aimed at 28nm processes. While this marks a step from R&D into initial customer validation, the author cautions against over-optimism. The piece clarifies this is DUV, not EUV technology. DUV is crucial but cannot economically solve challenges for advanced nodes like 5nm or below, where EUV is key. The 5-unit volume is minimal compared to ASML's annual output of over 130 such machines. The author highlights unverified claims regarding specs like 90% yield and warns against conflating this news with unconfirmed reports about Shanghai Micro Electronics' production. China's EUV efforts, while progressing with a prototype, remain in early testing, facing significant hurdles in core components like high-precision optics. The analogy of a "DeepSeek moment" is deemed misleading, as lithography involves slow, iterative precision engineering, not rapid software-like breakthroughs. Current progress represents establishing a potential second supply source and gaining vital engineering experience rather than an imminent industry disruption. For investors, the key indicators to watch are formal customer acceptance, stable operational performance, repeat orders, and growth in production volume and component localization. The conclusion is that this is a positive but early-stage development, far from altering the global competitive landscape.

marsbit15 хв тому

Take a Calm Look at Domestic Lithography Machines: 5 Units Delivered, How Far Are We from Challenging ASML?

marsbit15 хв тому

The 800x Golden Dog, "Gacha" Saves NFT Trading

Title: 800x Golden Dog: How 'Gacha' Mechanics Are Rescuing NFT Trading In the past month, the on-chain TCG (Trading Card Game) narrative, centered around "gacha" or loot box mechanics, has emerged as a major crypto-native revenue generator, second only to platforms like Hyperliquid and pump.fun. Recently, this trend hit Ethereum with Fake World Assets (FWA). Within just over a week, FWA generated approximately $1.3 million in revenue, ranking 15th in the past week's crypto app earnings. Its token, $FWA, surged from an initial market cap of ~$47,550 to a peak of ~$38.8 million—an 800x gain. Meanwhile, Collector Cards' token $CARDS declined significantly from its previous highs. FWA, developed by the team behind "PunkStrategy," operates as an NFT gacha system with a built-in token flywheel. Users deposit NFTs paired with ETH as liquidity into pools. Each deposit creates a personal pool; more ETH deposited lowers the chance of the NFT being "won" in a draw. Players spend ETH to "draw" (gacha). If they get an undesirable NFT, they can instantly sell it back to the original depositor at an 85% discount, generating income for the depositor. A 1% fee is taken on each draw and on depositor earnings when an NFT is kept. The key to FWA's momentum is its token $FWA. It cannot be bought directly externally. The primary way to acquire it is by playing the gacha and choosing to receive $FWA (instead of ETH) when selling back an unwanted NFT. This mechanism creates constant buy pressure for $FWA as players engage, especially during its price ascent. Early participants who held $FWA benefited massively from subsequent inflows. This contrasts with projects like Collector Cards, which, despite strong revenues, suffer from perceived low token utility beyond buybacks. In conclusion, while FWA's flywheel design—linking speculative token gains directly to NFT trading activity—has driven rapid growth, its sustainability is questionable. The model relies heavily on continuous $FWA price appreciation to offset the inherent negative expectancy of each draw. When price momentum stalls, activity will likely decline. The case highlights that in crypto markets, pure profitability narratives can be fleeting; understanding the relationship between attention, token buy pressure, and sustainable mechanics is crucial to avoid speculative pitfalls.

marsbit40 хв тому

The 800x Golden Dog, "Gacha" Saves NFT Trading

marsbit40 хв тому

The Quantum Computing Threat Approaches, Cryptocurrency May Be Exposed to Risks Before Banks

Quantum computing poses a significant threat to all cryptographic systems, including banks and governments, but decentralized cryptocurrencies with public ledgers like Bitcoin are likely the first practical target. Experts warn that a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC), capable of running Shor's algorithm to break the elliptic curve cryptography securing most crypto wallets, could emerge around 2029. Recent research shows the required quantum resources for such attacks are shrinking dramatically, potentially enabling key extraction in minutes. The core vulnerability for cryptocurrencies is not the cryptography itself—post-quantum standards are being developed—but the slow, decentralized governance required to implement upgrades. Unlike centralized banks that can swiftly transition, Bitcoin needs near-unanimous consensus among its global network, a historically difficult process as seen in past upgrades. Estimates suggest migrating all vulnerable Bitcoin funds could take at least 76 days of dedicated network time, and it must be completed before a CRQC exists to prevent "now-or-never" attacks on exposed keys. The threat is not binary; it begins when a quantum computer can decrypt data before it loses value, not necessarily in real-time. A significant portion of Bitcoin (estimated at millions of coins) already has public keys permanently exposed on-chain, making them vulnerable to eventual "static attacks." While technical solutions exist, the race is against time for decentralized networks to coordinate a defensive transition, serving as an early warning for the broader financial system.

marsbit51 хв тому

The Quantum Computing Threat Approaches, Cryptocurrency May Be Exposed to Risks Before Banks

marsbit51 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片