TL;DR
- The Ethereum Foundation publicly defines which DeFi projects earn its direct support.
- Oracle security exposes structural failures the crypto sector has long avoided addressing.
- Open-source licensing restrictions quietly reproduce the centralized control DeFi promised to end.
For years, any protocol running on a public blockchain automatically earned the label “decentralized.” That ambiguity convinced investors and developers alike that the term meant something guaranteed. It didn’t. The Ethereum Foundation stepped in with a public statement that cuts through the noise: not everything running onchain deserves the organization’s backing, and the criteria are now written down.
The document the Foundation published doesn’t function as a technical roadmap — it works as a declaration of values with real consequences. The organization describes the kind of decentralized finance it wants to see grow and, with equal clarity, the kind it prefers to let walk alone. That distinction matters because the Foundation is not a passive observer. Its technical, reputational, and financial support directly shapes which projects gain traction within the Ethereum network.
The most demanding criterion the Foundation introduces is not technical but conceptual. A protocol is worth exactly what it delivers without its creators. If the founding team vanishes tomorrow, loses control of its keys, or turns against its own users, the protocol must keep working exactly the same way. The Foundation calls this the walkaway test, and few projects in production today would pass it without substantial changes.
When Security Stops Being a Marketing Argument
One of the most revealing sections of the document addresses oracle security in DeFi. For those outside the technical layer: oracles are the systems that feed smart contracts with data from the outside world — asset prices, interest rates, event outcomes. Without reliable oracles, most of DeFi simply stops working. The problem is that the sector has spent years avoiding a direct look at the structural weaknesses baked into those systems.
The Foundation doesn’t soften its language. It describes the current state of oracle security as a drawer packed with unresolved problems that nobody has wanted to open. Coming from the organization that oversees the development of the base protocol, that framing carries real weight.
Privacy in DeFi raises a different question. Today, nearly all onchain financial activity is public by default. Anyone with access to a block explorer can see which wallet borrows funds, how much collateral it deposits, and when a position approaches its liquidation threshold.
Building genuine privacy over collateralized debt mechanisms requires advanced cryptography, but the Foundation considers the effort worthwhile.
The third area under examination is open-source licensing in DeFi protocols
Several prominent DeFi protocols operate under licenses that restrict copying, auditing, or modification. For the Foundation, that contradicts the foundations of the sector. A protocol that cannot be freely audited or forked without legal consequences introduces dependencies that reproduce, in a different form, the same centralized control DeFi set out to eliminate.
What the Ethereum Foundation puts on the table is neither a regulation nor a ban. Ethereum remains a permissionless protocol, and any developer can deploy whatever they want on top of it. But the Foundation chooses its collaborators, and those choices now come with written, public criteria.
The organization signals openness to working with any team building permissionless, open-source, privacy-preserving, and security-first financial protocols — and equal indifference toward projects that wrap centralized control in decentralized aesthetics.
In a sector where narrative frequently outpaces substance, publishing those criteria publicly already shifts the temperature of the conversation.
