Uncovering the Capabilities of Hana Network’s Key Component
Introduction
In our previous article, we provided an overview of Hana Network.
In this article, we delves deeper into one of its key components, ‘Hana Transporter’ , which facilitates secure and trustless asset transfers across all chains within Hana Network ecosystem.
This comparative analysis focuses on three key aspects of Hana Transporter, which are its ability to ensure privacy, trustless, and seamless asset transfers across all chains.
Project Comparison
This comparison pertains to projects that enable transfers in multi-chain and cross-chain environments, focusing on bridges and interoperability.
Hana Network
In Hana Network, the use of ‘Hana Transporter’ enables interoperability between various chains and allows for confidential transactions.
‘Hana Transporter’ uses the TSS(Threshold Signature Scheme) mechanism, which enables the trustless relay of assets to the Hana Network. During this process, interactions are anonymized using zero-knowledge proofs within Hana Network, ensuring user privacy while enabling bridging.
By utilizing ‘Hana Transporter’, users can bridge tokens not only from EVM chains but also from various chains like Bitcoin and Move chain to the Layer0 for Privacy in a trustless.
ZetaChain
ZataChain, which develops interoperable dApps and facilitates messaging between connected chains, has nodes (observers) on each connected chain with full nodes to monitor transactions.
As seen in this image, as part of ZetaChain, observers can trustlessly deploy assets from external chains to ZetaChain through messaging. This enables the handling of assets from different chains as if they were on a single chain.
However, it’s important to note that on ZetaChain, all transactions are public, and the smart contracts on ZetaChain are based on a mechanism called ZVM, which is derived from EVM. As a result, achieving privacy is quite challenging.
Namada
Namada can be considered the closest to Hana Network among the projects discussed here.
Namada utilizes MASP (The Multi Asset Shielded Pool) with zk-SNARKs, allowing for the transfer to be conducted with the confidentiality of assets.
In addition, Namada allows Ethereum bridging by having validators on Namada run as full nodes on Ethereum. Like ZetaChain, the ultimate goal is to support assets from various chains on Namada, but Namada’s advantage lies in its ability to handle these assets with privacy.
A potential drawback is the requirement to maintain full nodes on Ethereum, which could lead to significant validator costs.
In this regard, Hana Network’s TSS mechanism does not necessitate such substantial costs.
Aztec
Aztec is a shielded privacy protocol built as a Layer 2 protocol on Ethereum.
Using zk-SNARKs to create proofs twice, it enables privacy and scalability. This zk-SNARK utilizes a dedicated language called Noir, allowing for more advanced zero-knowledge proofs while connecting with Ethereum.
However, Aztec operates as a Layer 2 protocol on Ethereum, limiting its connectivity to various networks, unlike Hana Network.
Polyhedra
Polyhedra is a privacy bridge platform that uses zk-SNARKs and is fully integrated with LayerZero’s messaging protocol. This means that chains and tokens supported by LayerZero can easily be utilized on Polyhedra.
The relayers on Polyhedra are executed by zk-LightClient, enabling more efficient computation by dividing the computational load of zero-knowledge proofs.
However, it’s important to note that with Polyhedra’s bridging, trust in the LayerZero framework is required, as it is not strictly a trustless bridge. Furthermore, LayerZero is limited to native assets supported on each chain during the bridging process, lacking the flexibility seen in Hana Network.
Conclusion
In this comparison, we have explored Hana Network’s significant features: ‘privacy,’ ‘trustless,’ and ‘multichain,’ in contrast to several other projects.
Hana Network offers an exceptional solution in terms of ‘privacy,’ ‘trustless,’ and ‘multichain’ capabilities. Moreover, by using TSS for external chain connections, it becomes operationally more cost-effective than maintaining full nodes on connected chains.
By utilizing Hana Transporter, users can conduct asset transfers more securely, with greater choices, and at a lower cost.
