MEV declared the main enemy of Ethereum: a new manifesto from the interim director of the EF
Ethereum Foundation (EF) Interim Co-Executive Director Bastian Aue presented a detailed plan for implementing the foundation's mandate, in which Maximal Extractable Value (MEV) is named one of the most critical risks for the network. This document is not just another roadmap, but essentially a declaration of intent defining the path the foundation will choose in the coming years.
MEV as the "Next Major Front"
Aue emphasizes that combating toxic MEV is not a technical nuance of market infrastructure, but a central task of the Ethereum Foundation. He calls it the "next major front of the cypherpunk war." The main risks, in his view, include privileged access to the transaction flow, cartelization of builders, opaque routing, and validator dependence on a narrow circle of service providers. A formally open network, Aue warns, could effectively turn into an intermediary one if users depend on a limited number of infrastructure players.
Encrypted Mempools: Panacea or New Trap?
The EF analyst warns that individual technical solutions, such as encrypted mempools, may create new risks. They reduce transparency before transaction execution, but simultaneously shift advantages to new privileged participants, including operators of specialized hardware. Aue also points out the limitations of solutions like FOCIL and ePBS, which, while solving some problems, may generate others — for example, new forms of cross-block MEV. The key takeaway: point-by-point combat against individual manifestations of MEV is ineffective; a systemic approach to value extraction at the protocol level is necessary.
Privacy, Staking, and Spin-offs
The second important topic is privacy. Aue advocates for a model where confidentiality by default is built into the base layer, with mechanisms for selective data disclosure layered on top. He states that a public ledger without serious privacy settings becomes "surveillance infrastructure with settlement guarantees." Additionally, the EF plans to transition employee compensation to ETH and native stablecoins in order to test the infrastructure themselves and face the same problems as ordinary users.
Staking concentration is also named as an infrastructure risk. Aue warns that if liquidity, access to validators, and governance influence become concentrated around a small number of issuers, Ethereum's security will become vulnerable through the economic layer. Regarding spin-offs, the foundation will evaluate them based on strict criteria: importance to the mandate, the existence of a more suitable organizational base, and risks of capture or opacity.
My analysis: This is not just a shift in priorities, but a fundamental change in the philosophy of the Ethereum Foundation. Recognizing MEV as the main enemy while simultaneously warning about the risks of "magic pills" like encrypted mempools shows that the EF understands the depth of the problem. However, the question remains open: can the foundation, with its limited resources and mandate, effectively combat the economic incentives driving toxic MEV? This will be a test of strength for the entire ecosystem.