Open Intents: Can ERC-7683 Become the "Walmart" of Ethereum Cross-Chain Intent Coordination?

By: blockbeats|2025/02/26 13:30:03
Share
copy
Original Title: The Open Intents Framework: Intents As A Public Good
Original Author: YBB Capital Researcher Ac-Core

1. How to Solve Ethereum's Fragmentation Issue

Open Intents: Can ERC-7683 Become the

Image Source: @ethereumfndn

With the rise of various L2 solutions and DeFi applications, Ethereum's liquidity fragmentation issue has become increasingly apparent. This is primarily characterized by the difficulty of unifying asset liquidity within the ecosystem, as assets are fragmented across L1 and various L2 chains. Competition for TVL among different L2 solutions has led to assets and transactions being spread across multiple decentralized platforms and protocols. However, these platforms lack effective interconnection and interoperability, causing liquidity on each chain to operate within its own separate "silos," exacerbating Ethereum's overall fragmentation cost.

Over 100+ new Ethereum chains are expected to launch in 2024 alone, resembling a scenario where entering a marketplace filled with diverse products requires settling transactions using different national currencies. On February 20 of this year, the Ethereum Foundation, acting akin to the "Emperor Qin Shi Huang unifying measurement," announced the launch of the Open Intents Framework, allowing Ethereum to have a seamless transaction experience akin to being on a single chain. Within just a few days, it garnered support from over 50 protocols.

According to the explanation on openintents.xyz, the Open Intents Framework consists of three core components (see Reference 1 for more information):

1. Open Resolver: The framework provides an open resolver written in TypeScript that can monitor on-chain events and process intents. Unlike resolvers dependent on specific infrastructure, this shared-reference resolver is protocol-agnostic, supporting functions such as indexing, transaction submission, and rebalancing. Developers can customize and adjust it according to their needs.

2. Composable Smart Contracts: The framework offers a series of pre-built smart contracts based on the ERC-7683 standard, which defines the logic for interpreting, executing, and settling intents. It inherently supports limit order transactions and Hyperlane ISM settlement.

3. UI Template: The framework also provides a pre-built, customizable user interface template designed to make the intent product more accessible to end users.

II. Core of the Open Intents Framework ERC-7683

Image Source: @KanishkKhurana_

ERC-7683 is a universal standard for cross-chain intents on Ethereum, jointly developed by Across (@AcrossProtocol) and Uniswap Labs (@Uniswap) to achieve cross-chain intent through standardization. It aims to provide a unified, standardized framework for Ethereum and other blockchains to express and execute cross-chain operations, especially across multiple L2 solutions and sidechains.

Core Content and Components of ERC-7683:

1. CrossChainOrder Structure: Defines the format of a cross-chain order to ensure consistency across different blockchains and platforms. It standardizes how cross-chain transactions are composed, enabling interoperability between operations on different chains;

2. ISettlementContract Interface: Standardizes the handling of the settlement process. ERC-7683 defines through this interface how transaction settlements are handled across different chains, allowing cross-chain transactions to flexibly execute settlements across different platforms, supporting customized transaction flows;

3. Fulfill: ERC-7683 introduces the "Fulfill" mechanism, allowing participants to competitively complete cross-chain intents in a shared network. Participants lower costs and improve efficiency by providing services in these networks (e.g., executing orders), enabling cross-chain transactions to be completed more efficiently, optimizing the user experience;

4. Fill Deadline: This is a Uni X timestamp marking the expiration time of the cross-chain intent. If the intent is not completed within the specified time, it will expire, avoiding long wait times for invalid transactions, etc.;

5. Order Data Type: Uses an EIP-712 type hash to specify the structure and format of intent data. Through this type hash, developers and platforms can clearly define how data is formatted for transmission and interpretation across different chains;

6. Order Data: Order Data includes the core parameters of a cross-chain transaction, such as the token, amount, chain, and recipient. These parameters define the expected outcome of the cross-chain transaction. It ensures that transaction participants can accurately understand and execute the cross-chain operation.

One of the key advantages of ERC-7683 is its ability to achieve seamless cross-chain interaction. By standardizing the expression of cross-chain intent, users can perform operations between different blockchains without the need for complex setups, such as token swaps or NFT transfers. This simplifies the operational process within a standardized framework, significantly reducing the technical barriers to cross-chain operations and enabling users to conduct cross-chain transactions more conveniently.

Furthermore, ERC-7683 enhances governance capabilities. It streamlines the governance process between different blockchains, particularly for Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs), making it easier to manage proposals and decisions across multiple chains. The uniformity of ERC-7683 enables DAOs to conduct cross-chain governance more efficiently on various platforms, improving governance flexibility and transparency.

3. The Ultimate Abstraction of Intent and DeFAI

Image Source: Self-made

Whether it is Intent or DeFAI, both are fundamentally derived from the financial attributes of DeFi. However, DeFi only has two real problems to solve: scalability and liquidity. Intent appears to have more practical significance in aggregating liquidity through UNI and ERC-7683, while DeFAI becomes more interesting with the wave of AI narrative and the automated AI trading already achieved by Hey Anon (@HeyAnonai). The respective solutions of Intent and DeFAI mainly focus on enhancing the user experience of DeFi, optimizing transaction execution, and strengthening protocol stability and security, but with differences:

The core objective of Intent is to simplify user interaction through an "intent-driven transaction" mechanism. Users can set the intent and strategy of a transaction, which the system automatically executes without requiring manual intervention at each step. This not only enhances the usability of DeFi but also optimizes strategy execution, improving transaction efficiency. Additionally, Intent may use cross-chain technology to address liquidity bottlenecks in DeFi. By enhancing cross-chain liquidity, Intent helps break down barriers between different chains, optimize liquidity pools, and thus improve the market depth and transaction efficiency of decentralized exchanges.

DeFAI, as an AI-based decentralized finance protocol, focuses on addressing compliance and risk management issues in DeFi. DeFAI utilizes AI technology to analyze and predict market trends, helping the protocol identify potential risks to enhance protocol stability and reduce operational risks. AI can process large amounts of market data to provide users with more precise decision support, optimizing market operations and risk management.

To address the issue of liquidity fragmentation, we have seen abstraction from account to chain to intent and to DeFAI. Ultimately, abstraction knows no bounds, with technology and market demands driving the creation of more abstraction layers. While we need abstraction, it should also be moderate. The issue of liquidity fragmentation itself resembles more of an "ecosystem integration problem," relying not only on increasing abstraction layers but also on optimizing existing protocols.

Four, Why Only Uniswap Can Truly Drive the Development of ERC-7683

Image Source: @Uniswap

Although "intent" is a grand narrative concept, in my personal view, the core support of ERC-7683 can only be driven to realization by Uniswap. The reason is that both Intent and DeFAI fundamentally aim to better serve DeFi, and the key element in maintaining the healthy development of DeFi is market liquidity. This dependency relationship needs to be based on the "efficient liquidity provision" and "deeply integrated liquidity" conditions.

1. Liquidity Advantage of Uniswap V4

The introduction of Uniswap V4 has made liquidity pool management more flexible and efficient, especially for concentrated liquidity provision in different price ranges. This mechanism optimizes capital efficiency, making cross-chain transactions smoother. In the V3 version, each new pool needed a separate smart contract deployment, leading to high gas costs. In V4, a single PoolManager contract replaces this, consolidating all pools' management, reducing deployment costs by 99%, and lowering exchange costs. Additionally, Hooks allow for customized AMM pools, enabling the ERC-7683 protocol to adjust based on various market needs, better matching different trading pairs and asset liquidity.

2. Potential of Uniswap X

Uni X is expected to further enhance cross-chain interoperability. It may introduce a new cross-chain bridging mechanism or deep integration with ERC-7683 to provide a more efficient cross-chain asset exchange channel. If Uni X can provide a cross-chain liquidity solution, it will become a key platform for executing cross-chain intents using ERC-7683. Therefore, through leveraging Uni X's liquidity pool and technological optimizations, ERC-7683 can achieve seamless cross-chain transactions on a larger scale.

3. Implementation Dependency of Cross-Chain Protocol

Since ERC-7683 relies on standardized cross-chain transaction structures and settlement mechanisms, and Uniswap holds a significant position in decentralized exchanges. The protocol is likely to depend on Uniswap's liquidity pool, automated market-making, and cross-chain transaction capabilities, especially with the support of Uniswap X and Unichain. Uniswap can not only support the efficient execution of ERC-7683 but most crucially ensure the stability and security of its cross-chain and multi-asset transactions.

5. What is the Practical Significance of Intent

When we set aside the abstract definition of "intent," it can actually be understood as a specific transaction goal or driving force. The concept of intent can be traced back to the article "Intent-Based Architectures and Their Risks" published by Paradigm on June 1, 23, which explains the concept of intent. However, it has always been in the conceptual stage, and the issues of fragmented liquidity and solver's solution path have not been solved. However, the emergence of ERC-7683 seems to shed light on a more optimal solution to the fragmented liquidity problem.

The ultimate goal is to inject new vitality into Uniswap, hoping that Uniswap will trigger a new wave of DeFi frenzy. Therefore, intent and ERC-7683 are not just about continuing L2 scaling but achieving more efficient transactions through Uniswap, creating richer features and stronger cross-chain interoperability, and even introducing new incentive mechanisms or transaction models to attract more users and liquidity.

If Uniswap V4 or Uniswap X introduces some new smart contract logic or transaction models at the protocol level, through ERC-7683, Uniswap can further enhance cross-chain liquidity, reduce transaction costs, and add more trading pairs and liquidity pools on top of the existing AMM model. It will make Uniswap more than just a liquidity-diluted AMM, and these improvements will also be a crucial part of the "intent."

This article is a contribution and does not represent the views of BlockBeats.

You may also like

a16z Leads $18M Seed Round for Catena Labs, Crypto Industry Bets on Stablecoin AI Payment

Traditional finance is still stuck in a "human-to-human" model, while Catena aims to achieve "AI-to-AI" interaction.

Pharos, deeply integrated with AntChain, is about to launch. How can we get involved?

What is the relationship between the $8 million funded NewChain and Ant, and how will they interact?

$COIN Joins S&P 500, but Coinbase Isn't Celebrating

On May 13, S&P Dow Jones Indices announced that Coinbase would officially replace Discover Financial Services in the S&P 500 on May 19. While other companies like Block and MicroStrategy, closely tied to Bitcoin, were already part of the S&P 500, Coinbase became the first cryptocurrency exchange whose primary business is in the index. This also signifies that cryptocurrency is gradually moving from the fringes to the mainstream in the U.S.



On the day of the announcement, Coinbase's stock price surged by 23%, surpassing the $250 mark. However, just 3 days later, Coinbase was hit by two consecutive events: a hack where employees were bribed to steal customer data and a demand for a $20 million ransom, and an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) into the authenticity of its claim of having over 100 million "verified users" in its securities filings and marketing materials. These two events acted as mini-bombs, and at the time of writing, Coinbase's stock had already dropped by over 7.3%.


Coincidentally, Discover Financial Services, being replaced by Coinbase, can also be considered the "Coinbase" of the previous payment era. Discover is a U.S.-based digital banking and payment services company headquartered in Illinois, founded in 1960. Its payment network, Discover Network, is the fourth largest payment network apart from Visa, Mastercard, and American Express.


In April, after the approval of the acquisition of Discover by the sixth-largest U.S. bank, Capital One, this well-established digital banking company of over 60 years smoothly handed over its S&P 500 "seat" to this emerging cryptocurrency "bank." This unexpected coincidence also portrayed the handover between the new and old eras in Coinbase's entry into the S&P 500, resembling a relay race scene. However, this relay baton also brought Coinbase's accumulated "external troubles and internal strife" to a tipping point.


Side Effects of ETFs


Over the past decade, cryptocurrency exchanges have been the most stable "profit machines." They play a role in providing liquidity to the entire industry and rely on trading fees to sustain their operations. However, with the comprehensive rollout of ETF products in the U.S. market, this profit model is facing unprecedented challenges. As the leader in the "American stack," with over 80% of its business coming from the U.S., Coinbase is most affected by this.



Starting from the approval of Bitcoin and Ethereum spot ETFs, traditional financial capital has significantly onboarded users and funds that originally belonged to exchanges in a more cost-effective, compliant, and transparent manner. The transaction fee revenue of cryptocurrency exchanges has started to decline, and this trend may further intensify in the coming months.


According to Coinbase's 2024 Q4 financial report, the platform's total trading revenue was $417 million, a 45% year-on-year decrease. The contribution of BTC and ETH's trading revenue dropped from 65% in the same period last year to less than 50%.


This decline is not a result of a decrease in market enthusiasm. In fact, since the approval of the Bitcoin ETF in January 2024, the inflow of BTC into the U.S. market has continued to reach new highs, with asset management giants like BlackRock and Fidelity rapidly expanding their management scale. Data shows that BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) alone has surpassed $17 billion in assets under management. As of mid-May 2025, the cumulative net inflow of 11 major institutional Bitcoin spot ETFs on the market has exceeded $41.5 billion, with a total net asset value of $1214.69 billion, accounting for approximately 5.91% of the total Bitcoin market capitalization.


Chart showing the trend of net outflows for Grayscale among the 11 institutions


Institutional investors and some retail investors are shifting towards ETF products, partly due to compliance and tax considerations. On one hand, ETFs have much lower trading costs compared to cryptocurrency exchanges. While Coinbase's spot trading fee rate varies annually in a tiered manner but averages around 1.49%, for example, the management fee for IBIT ETF is only 0.25%, and the majority of ETF institution fees fluctuate around 0.15% to 0.25%.



In other words, the more rational users are, the more likely they are to move from exchanges to ETF products, especially for investors aiming for long-term holdings.


According to multiple sources, several institutions, including VanEck and Grayscale, have submitted applications to the SEC for a Solana (SOL) ETF, with some institutions also planning to submit an XRP ETF proposal. Once approved, this may trigger a new round of fund migration. According to a report submitted by Coinbase to the SEC, as of April, the platform's trading revenue from XRP and Solana accounted for 18% and 10%, nearly one-third of the platform's fee revenue.



However, the Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs passed in 2024 also reduced the fees for these two tokens on Coinbase from 30% and 15% to 26% and 10%, respectively. If the SOL and XRP ETFs are approved, it will further undermine the core fee revenue of exchanges like Coinbase.


The expansion of ETF products is gradually weakening the financial intermediary status of cryptocurrency exchanges. From their original roles as matchmakers and clearers to now gradually becoming mere "on-ramps and off-ramps" for funds, exchanges are seeing their marginal value squeezed by ETFs.


Robinhood Takes a Stand, Traditional Brokerages Join the Fray


On May 12, 2025, SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins gave a keynote speech at the Tokenization and Cryptocurrency Working Group roundtable. The theme of his speech revolved around "It is a new day at the SEC," where he indicated that the SEC would not approach enforcement and regulation the same way as before but would instead pave the way for cryptocurrency assets in the U.S. market.



With signs of cryptocurrency compliance such as the SEC's "NEW DAY" declaration, an increasing number of traditional brokerages are attempting to enter the cryptocurrency industry. One of the most representative cases is the well-known U.S. brokerage Robinhood, which began expanding its crypto business in 2018. By the time of its IPO in 2021, Robinhood's crypto business revenue accounted for over 50% of the company, with a significant boost from the Dogecoin "moonshot" promoted by Musk.


In Q1 2025 earnings report, Robinhood showcased strong growth, especially in revenue from cryptocurrency and options trading. Fueled by Trump's Memecoin, cryptocurrency-related revenue reached $250 million, nearly doubling year-over-year. Consequently, Robinhood Gold subscription users reached 3.5 million, a 90% increase from the previous year, with the rapid growth of Robinhood Gold providing the company with a stable source of income.



Meanwhile, RobinHood is actively pursuing acquisitions in the cryptocurrency space. In 2024, it announced a $2 billion acquisition of the long-standing European cryptocurrency exchange Bitstamp. Additionally, Canada's largest cryptocurrency CEX, WonderFi, which recently went public on the Toronto Stock Exchange, also announced its integration with RobinHood Crypto. After obtaining virtual asset licenses in the UK, Canada, Singapore, and other markets, RobinHood has taken a proactive approach in the compliant cryptocurrency trading market.



Furthermore, an increasing number of brokerage firms are exploring the same path. Futu Securities, Tiger Brokers, and others are also dipping their toes into cryptocurrency trading, with some having applied for or obtained the VA license from the Hong Kong SFC. Although their user bases are currently small, traditional brokerages have a natural advantage in user trust, regulatory licenses, and low fee structures. This could pose a threat to native cryptocurrency platforms in the future.



User Data Breach: Is Coinbase Still Secure?


In April 2025, security researchers discovered that some Coinbase user data was leaked on the dark web. While the platform initially responded by attributing it to a "technical misinformation," it still raised concerns among users regarding its security and privacy protection. Just two days before Dow Jones Indexes announced Coinbase's addition to the S&P 500 Index, on May 11, 2025, Coinbase received an email from an unknown threat actor claiming to have obtained customer account information and internal documents, demanding a $20 million ransom to keep the data private. Subsequent investigations confirmed the data breach.


Cybercriminals obtained the data by bribing overseas customer service agents and support staff, mainly in "non-U.S. regions such as India." These agents abused their access to Coinbase's internal customer support system and stole customer data. As early as February this year, blockchain detective ZachXBT revealed on X platform that between December 2024 and January 2025, Coinbase users lost over $65 million to social engineering scams, with the actual amount potentially higher.


Among the victims was a well-known figure, 67-year-old Ed Suman, an established artist in the art world for nearly two decades, having been involved in the creation of artworks such as Jeff Koons' "Balloon Dog" sculpture. Earlier this year, he fell victim to an impersonation scam involving fake Coinbase customer support, resulting in a loss of over $2 million in cryptocurrency. ZachXBT critiqued Coinbase for its inadequate handling of such scams, noting that other major exchanges have not faced similar issues and recommending Coinbase to enhance its security measures.


Amidst a series of ongoing social engineering incidents, although there has not been any impact on user assets at the technical level so far, it has raised concerns among many retail and institutional investors. Especially institutions holding massive assets on Coinbase. Just considering the U.S. BTC ETF institutions, as of mid-May 2025, they collectively hold nearly 840,000 BTC, and 75% of these are custodied by Coinbase. If we price BTC at $100,000, this amount reaches a staggering $63 billion, which is equivalent to the nominal GDP of two Iceland in the year 2024.


Visualization: ChatGPT, Source: Farside


In addition, Coinbase Custody also serves over 300 institutional clients, including hedge funds, family offices, pension funds, and endowments. As of the Q1 2025 financial report, Coinbase's total assets under management (including institutional and retail clients) reached $404 billion. The specific amount of institutional custodied assets was not explicitly disclosed in the latest report, but it should still be over 50% based on the Q4 2024 report.


Visualization: ChatGPT


Once this security barrier is breached, not only could the rate of user attrition far exceed expectations, but more importantly, institutional trust in it would undermine the foundation of its business. Therefore, after a hacking event, Coinbase's stock price plummeted significantly.


CEXs are All in Self-Rescue Mode


Facing a decline in spot trading fee revenue, Coinbase is also accelerating its transformation, attempting to find growth opportunities in derivatives and emerging assets. Coinbase acquired a stake in the options platform Deribit at the end of 2024 and announced the official launch of perpetual contract products in 2025. This acquisition fills in Coinbase's gap in options trading and its relatively small global market share.



Deribit has a strong presence in non-U.S. markets, especially in Asia and Europe. The acquisition has enabled Coinbase to gain a dominant position in bitcoin and ethereum options trading on Deribit, accounting for approximately 80% of the global options trading volume, with daily trading volume remaining above $2 billion.


Meanwhile, 80-90% of Deribit's customer base consists of institutional investors, with their professionalism and liquidity in the Bitcoin and Ethereum options market highly favored by institutions. Coinbase's compliance advantage, coupled with its already robust institutional ecosystem, makes it even more suitable. By using institutions as an entry point, it can face the squeeze from giants like Binance and OKX in the derivatives market.



Facing a similar dilemma is Kraken, which is attempting to replicate Binance Futures' model in non-U.S. markets. Since the derivatives market relies more on professional users, fee rates are relatively higher and stickiness is stronger, making it a significant source of revenue for exchanges. In the first half of 2025, Kraken completed the acquisition of TradeStation Crypto and a futures exchange, aiming to build a complete derivatives trading ecosystem to hedge the risk of declining spot transaction fee income.


With the surge of Memecoin in 2024, Binance, OKX, and various CEX platforms began massively listing small-market-cap, highly volatile tokens to activate active trading users. Due to the wealth effect and trading activity of Memecoins, Coinbase was also forced to join the battle, successively listing popular tokens from the Solana ecosystem such as BOOK OF MEME and Dogwifhat. Although these coins are controversial, they are frequently traded, with fee rates several times higher than mainstream coins, serving as a "blood-boosting" method for spot trading.


However, due to its status as a publicly traded company, this practice is a riskier endeavor for Coinbase. Even in the current crypto-friendly environment, the SEC is still investigating whether tokens like SOL, ADA, and SAND constitute securities.


In addition to the forced transformation strategies carried out by the aforementioned CEXs, they are also starting to lay out RWAs and the most talked-about stablecoin payment fields, such as the PYUSD launched through a collaboration between Coinbase and Paypal, Coinbase's support for the Euro stablecoin EURC by Circle that complies with EU MiCA regulatory requirements, or the USD1 launched through a collaboration between Binance and WIFL. In the increasingly crowded trading field, many CEXs have shifted their focus from just the trading market to the application field.


The golden age of transaction fees has quietly ended, and the second half of the crypto exchange platform game has silently begun.


Key Market Insights for May 16th, how much did you miss out on?

1. On-chain Flows: $111.3M inflow to Ethereum this week; $237.6M outflow from Berachain 2. Largest Price Swings: $ETHFI, $NEIRO 3. Top News: Data: Solana Network's revenue reached $7.9M on the 13th, surpassing the sum of all other L1 and L2 chains

MOG Coin Skyrockets as Elon Musk and Garry Tan Embrace "mog/acc" Identity

「mog/acc」 is rapidly sweeping through various figures, from Elon Musk to Garry Tan, boosting the project's visibility and ultimately driving up the price.

The End and Rebirth of NFTs: How the Meme Coin Craze Ended the PFP Era?

There must be another Labubu hidden beneath the ruins.

Popular coins

Latest Crypto News

Read more