The Solana network has returned to the heart of the debate about the credibility of its decentralization, after recent data revealed a shocking reality:
More than half of the network's auditors primarily rely on the support of the Solana Foundation itself.
This dangerous reliance raises serious questions:
What if the foundation suddenly withdraws its support? Are we witnessing a total collapse of the Solana network?
Auditors on the brink of collapse: The fragile structure of Solana
According to what decentralized finance researcher Kydo published based on data from Helius Infrastructure, it appears that between 90% and 100% of the stakes of some Solana auditors come directly from the Solana Foundation.
Each bar in the chart he presented represents a single auditor, clearly showing how much they rely on the foundation's support for their continuation.
In other words:
Having many nodes does not represent true decentralization, but is a result of centralized funding from one party.
The real risk: What happens if the foundation withdraws?
Data warns that the termination of the Solana Foundation's financial support will lead to about 57% of the nodes ceasing operations immediately.
This halt does not only include small auditors, but will also affect the stability of the network as a whole, exposing Solana to a potentially catastrophic collapse.
And worse:
These figures do not take into account the high operational costs, such as hardware maintenance and network development (DevOps).
Which means that the potential impact could be much more severe than what is announced.
The Solana Foundation takes action: urgent repair before explosion
In an attempt to contain the crisis, the Solana Foundation announced on April 23 plans to amend the Foundation Delegation Program (SFDP).
According to statements by Mert, the CEO of Helius, the plans include:
Gradual elimination of auditors fully reliant on the foundation.
Enhancing the financial independence of the node.
Working on building a truly decentralized and more resilient network in the long term.
Unrelenting criticism: Has Solana misled users?
Despite these corrective steps, researchers believe that Solana has long relied on the number of nodes as a superficial indicator of decentralization, without verifying the financial independence of these nodes.
Kydo and the research community have harshly criticized Solana, asserting that the response to criticism was quick and hostile, rather than an open dialogue to address the flaws.
Stark comparison: Ethereum vs. Solana
Kydo pointed out that the Ethereum network has over 800,000 auditors, giving it a clear advantage in the principle of decentralization compared to Solana, which has only about 2,000 nodes.
He also called for the Ethereum community and Layer 2 development teams to closely study the internal structure of Solana to identify weaknesses and leverage them in future competition.
Open-ended: Can Solana save itself?
Kydo concluded his analysis by emphasizing that decentralization is not just a slogan to boast about, but is real infrastructure that requires:
Independence.
Distributed funding.
Full transparency in network management.
Questions remain:
Are the Solana Foundation's actions sufficient to save the network and rebuild community trust?
Or will deep structural reliance remain an obstacle to its leadership ambitions?
Risk warning:
Investing in cryptocurrencies carries high risks and may lead to significant losses. It is advisable to carefully assess risks before making any investment decisions.
Note:
If you'd like, I can also prepare a condensed version for you to post as a "post" or "tweet" with a catchy title to attract readers, such as:
"Solana at a crossroads: Potential collapse due to reliance on a single entity!"