Skip to main content

The Race for True Entropy | Why WEB3 Developers Choose RANDAO

· 4 min read
Kenny Swayzee
Kenny Swayzee
RANDAO Protocol Architect

1. Introduction​

Entropy—unpredictable randomness—is a foundational element in securing fairness across blockchain ecosystems. Whether used in games, lotteries, NFTs, or decentralized governance, the generation of truly random values ensures legitimacy, trust, and economic integrity.

Yet, achieving secure and verifiable randomness on-chain is remarkably difficult. Blockchain was not designed for entropy; deterministic by nature, it lacks native tools for non-predictable outcomes. This has led to an arms race: who can provide the most secure, performant, and trustless source of randomness?

➡️ See The Onchain Randomness Problem for more on why Blockchain's were not built for randomness.

2. The Need for Verifiable Randomness in Web3​

Many decentralized applications rely on randomness:

  • NFT minting: Random allocation of rarity tiers
  • GameFi: Critical in loot drops and gameplay mechanics
  • DeFi: Used in governance voting slates and reward distributions
  • On-chain lotteries: High-stakes randomness that must be tamper-proof

The Hot Lotto scandal, where an insider tampered with RNG systems to rig outcomes, reminds us of the catastrophic consequences when randomness can be predicted or manipulated.

Poor entropy damages trust, opens the door to exploits, and endangers both user assets and reputational capital.

3. The Onchain-RNG Trilema​

Blockchains have inherent limitations for entropy:

  • Blockhash-based randomness is insecure—miners or validators can influence the outcome by choosing whether to publish a block.
  • Oracles, like Chainlink VRF, inject off-chain data, but introduce centralized trust and external attack surfaces.
  • Multiparty compute (MPC) systems require a threshold of honest participants and are fragile to liveness failures if a subset becomes unresponsive or malicious.

Randomness solutions are ultimately constrained by the trade-off triangle: Trust, Transparency, and Liveness.

4. Evaluation Framework for Randomness Solutions​

To evaluate entropy providers, we use the following framework (inspired by 1, 2, 3):

4.1 Verifiability​

Any third party can confirm that randomness was generated correctly.

4.2 Uniqueness​

Output cannot be reused or replayed.

4.3 Liveness​

Random values are reliably produced in reasonable timeframes.

4.4 Robustness​

Protocol continues operating even with high numbers of malicious actors.

4.5 Latency​

Time between request and receipt of randomness.

4.6 Cost-Effectiveness​

Fees incurred by developers and users.

5. RANDAO: Protocol and Evolution​

RANDAO is a decentralized entropy protocol that leverages Time Lock Puzzles to enable any-honest randomness generation:

  • Architecture: Commit-reveal protocol with bonded incentives
  • Any-honest: Only one honest participant needed; can tolerate 99% malicious actors
  • Time Lock Puzzles: Replace slow Verifiable Delay Functions (VDFs) with faster mechanisms
  • Modular design: Collateralized participation ensures correct behavior

RANDAO Evaluation​

CriterionRating
Verifiability✅ Strong
Uniqueness✅ Strong
Liveness✅ Strong
Robustness✅ Strong
Latency✅ Low
Cost-Effectiveness✅ Efficient
Decentralized✅ Yes

Used by MekaHuman for sweepstakes and WeAreWe for NFT drops, RANDAO delivers reliable randomness at scale.

Chainlink VRF generates randomness by combining blockhash data with cryptographic proofs, then delivering the result via off-chain oracles.

Key Strengths​

  • Production-proven and well-documented
  • Verifiable results with cryptographic proof

Limitations​

  • Centralized oracle dependency contradicts Web3 trustlessness
  • Higher latency and costs due to external verification steps
CriterionRating
Verifiability✅ Strong
Uniqueness✅ Strong
Liveness⚠️ Moderate
Robustness⚠️ Oracle-based
Latency⚠️ Higher
Cost-Effectiveness⚠️ Expensive
Decentralized❌ No

7. drand: Public Randomness Beacons​

drand is a public randomness network built on threshold cryptography. Nodes generate randomness collectively and publicly.

Architecture​

  • Relies on MPC and threshold signatures
  • Used by Filecoin and the League of Entropy

Limitations​

  • Requires >1/3 honest participants—vulnerable to collusion
  • Susceptible to liveness failures if nodes go offline

drand Evaluation​

CriterionRating
Verifiability✅ Strong
Uniqueness✅ Strong
Liveness⚠️ Fragile
Robustness⚠️ 2/3 Honest
Latency✅ Low
Cost-Effectiveness✅ Public
Decentralized✅ Yes

8. Comparative Analysis​

FeatureRANDAOChainlink VRFdrand
Trust ModelAny-HonestOracle-Based2/3 Honest
Verifiability✅ Yes✅ Yes✅ Yes
Liveness✅ High⚠️ Moderate⚠️ Fragile
Robustness✅ Strong⚠️ Weak⚠️ Threshold
Cost✅ Low⚠️ Higher✅ Low
Latency✅ Low⚠️ Moderate✅ Low
Decentralized✅ Yes❌ No✅ Yes

9. Conclusion​

Randomness is more than a technical detail—it's the pillar of fairness. Projects that prioritize trustlessness, decentralization, and robustness will lean toward RANDAO as their entropy solution.

Telegram

References​

  1. DID-based Distributed Verifiable Random Function with Successor Rule-based de Bruijn Sequence in Blockchain, DOI:10.1145/3651655.3651670
  2. Smart Contract-based Secure Verifiable Random Function using ChaCha20 Sequence in Blockchain, DOI:10.1145/3638025.3638028
  3. FlexiRand: Output Private (Distributed) VRFs and Application to Blockchains, DOI:10.1145/3576915.3616601