Cyber Capital founder Justin Bons criticized XRPL on X platform, claiming that its unique node list (UNL) mechanism requires validators to obtain permission, calling it a “centralized blockchain”; Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz publicly rebutted, emphasizing that XRPL’s design is intended to prevent any single entity from controlling the network, including Ripple itself.
Justin Bons’s Centralization Allegation: UNL Mechanism is the Core Issue
Cyber Capital founder and CTO Justin Bons focused his criticism on XRPL’s UNL mechanism: any node deviating from Ripple’s published list could cause a fork, which in practice grants Ripple and its foundation substantial control over the blockchain.
Bons adopts a strict binary framework: blockchains are either fully permissionless (based on PoS or PoW) or inherently permissioned (PoA). He classifies systems that do not fit PoS or PoW as PoA, grouping XRPL with Stellar (XLM), Hedera, Algorand, and others into the “centralized permissioned chains,” pointing out that “trusting someone is not the same as being completely trustless.”
David Schwartz’s Rebuttal: Architecture Designed to Prevent Centralization
Ripple CTO David Schwartz responded from a technical architecture perspective. He pointed out that Ripple intentionally designed XRPL to be resistant to control by any single entity, partly motivated by regulatory considerations—since Ripple is a US-regulated company, it does not want to hold network control that could be enforced by courts.
Regarding double-spending and censorship allegations, Schwartz’s logic is as follows: XRPL reaches consensus roughly every five seconds, with each node independently following protocol rules and only considering validators in its own UNL. If a validator acts dishonestly, honest nodes can regard it as untrusted. Schwartz admits that validators could theoretically collude to disrupt the network, but this cannot result in double-spending, and the solution is to switch to a new UNL.
He further compares: “Bitcoin transactions are often censored, Ethereum transactions have been maliciously altered or censored, but XRPL transactions have never experienced such issues, and it’s hard to imagine how they could.”
Core Points of Schwartz’s Rebuttal
UNL is user-selected, not Ripple-mandated: Each node independently chooses which validators to trust; Ripple cannot force other nodes to adopt its published list.
Double-spending cannot be achieved: Validators cannot force honest nodes to accept double-spending; any attempt to censor or double-spend will immediately and permanently damage trust in XRPL.
Rationale for validator count design: Limiting the number of validators prevents malicious actors from attacking consensus with fake nodes, ensuring the network can determine whether consensus is truly reached.
Historical record evidence: Compared to Bitcoin and Ethereum, XRPL has no record of censorship or malicious tampering.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the Unique Node List (UNL) in XRPL, and why does it spark decentralization debates?
UNL is a list each XRPL node uses to decide which validators to trust. Ripple and the XRPL Foundation publish their recommended lists, but technically, any node can choose its own set of validators. Critics argue that most nodes follow Ripple’s recommended list, leading to practical centralization; supporters believe that the autonomy of node choices is a core decentralization feature of XRPL.
Can Ripple exert substantial control over transactions on XRPL?
According to Schwartz’s technical explanation, Ripple cannot force honest nodes to accept double-spending or censorship. If Ripple attempts to do so, it would permanently damage trust in the network. The system’s incentive mechanisms are designed to prevent such control. Honest nodes can respond by switching to a different UNL to exclude untrustworthy validators.
Does Justin Bons’s classification of XRPL as centralized reflect industry consensus?
No, this disagreement highlights that there is no unified standard in the industry for defining decentralization. Bons’s strict binary framework (PoS or PoW as decentralized) contrasts with supporters who believe that actual resistance to censorship and control distribution are better measures. This debate is part of broader discussions on blockchain decentralization standards, which currently lack an industry-wide consensus.
Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to
Disclaimer.
Related Articles
Internal doubts at Aave about Labs' past performance: raised $86 million, holds 23% of tokens, all six products failed or incurred losses
Aave Ecosystem Contributor Organization ACI Founder Marc Zeller Releases Report, Disclosing that Aave Labs has raised $86 million since 2017 and questioning the poor performance of several of its products. The report shows that the actual collateral size of the Horizon project is only $135 million, with small income but huge expenses. The discussion also involves issues of governance power centralization, and a new funding proposal is currently under review.
GateNewsBot15m ago
Six reasons why Bitcoin is not heading into a bear market based on long-term adoption trends from market prices
Bitcoin prices are declining, and market sentiment is subdued, but adoption and holding structures continue to grow. Institutional investor participation is increasing, indicating a shift toward long-term value-driven markets. Banks and corporations are gradually adopting Bitcoin, and payment infrastructure is expanding, with the global regulatory environment becoming more open. Overall, the Bitcoin market is shifting from speculation to long-term allocation, and future prospects are optimistic.
ChainNewsAbmedia29m ago
Hong Kong advances the implementation of the tokenized bond platform and connects with the regional tokenization center. Stablecoin license issuance begins in March.
February 25 News, Hong Kong is accelerating the development of core infrastructure for digital assets. Financial Secretary Paul Chan announced in the 2026-27 fiscal budget that Hong Kong will establish a brand-new digital asset platform within the year to support the issuance and settlement of tokenized bonds. The platform will be built and operated by CMU OmniClear Holdings, a subsidiary of the Hong Kong Monetary Authority, marking the official transition of tokenized bonds from pilot phase to a market-level infrastructure system.
This platform will gradually expand to include more categories of digital assets and achieve interoperability with regional tokenization platforms, forming a cross-market tokenized financial network. This move is seen as an important step to strengthen Hong Kong's position as a digital asset hub in China, while also improving on-chain settlement efficiency and asset liquidity. As post-trade infrastructure becomes part of the official financial system, the issuance mechanism for tokenized bonds is evolving toward standardization and institutionalization.
GateNewsBot1h ago
River Report: Bitcoin adoption remains out of the bear market, institutional holdings reach 829,000 coins
Financial services firm River released its annual Bitcoin adoption report on Tuesday, noting that despite BTC prices dropping more than 50% from all-time highs, the adoption rate of Bitcoin among institutions, banks, merchants, and sovereign governments is still experiencing significant growth in 2025. The report explicitly states: "Bitcoin's mainstream adoption has not entered a bear market," emphasizing that the speed and breadth of adoption growth have far exceeded market expectations for price movements, and Bitcoin is solidifying its position as a mature global asset class.
MarketWhisper2h ago
Bitcoin price fluctuates but adoption hits new highs: institutions, banks, and countries accelerate BTC reserve deployment
February 25 News, financial services firm River's latest report shows that although Bitcoin prices have fallen about 50% from their all-time high, the global adoption rate of Bitcoin continues to rise in 2025. Institutions, banks, publicly listed companies, and sovereign funds are accelerating their BTC allocations, driving Bitcoin's gradual transition toward a mainstream store of value. The report indicates that the growth rate of Bitcoin trustworthiness has surpassed that of most traditional assets, and its adoption process remains in an expansion phase rather than entering a recession cycle.
Data shows that by 2025, institutions will hold approximately 829,000 BTC, including corporate balance sheets, government reserves, funds, and related financial products. Registered investment advisors have been net accumulating Bitcoin for eight consecutive quarters, with an average quarterly inflow of about $1.5 billion into related asset allocations over the past two years, demonstrating that long-term capital is continuously entering the digital asset market through compliant channels. Meanwhile, about 60% of large US banks are developing Bitcoin custody, investment, and payment-related products, benefiting from a clearer crypto regulatory environment.
GateNewsBot3h ago
XRP Ledger Questioned for "Centralization"? Ripple CTO Responds, Decentralization Controversy Heats Up Again
February 25 News, the debate over whether XRP Ledger (XRPL) is a centralized blockchain has quickly heated up in the crypto community. Justin Bons, founder and CIO of Cyber Capital, publicly questioned the decentralization of XRPL, arguing that its reliance on the Unique Node List (UNL) mechanism essentially makes it a "permissioned blockchain," deviating from the true permissionless crypto network concept.
Justin Bons pointed out that XRPL validators typically refer to recommended node lists published by a central authority. Deviating from this list could lead to network forks, thereby structurally creating potential governance centralization risks. He also categorized XRPL alongside networks like Stellar, Hedera, and Algorand as "permissioned architectures," emphasizing that blockchains not based on PoW or PoS consensus might be closer to an authority proof model (PoA), making it difficult to achieve full trust minimization.
GateNewsBot3h ago
