Vitalik Buterin published a proposal introducing a long-term survivability benchmark he calls the “walkaway test.” Our takeaway is that he’s pushing Ethereum toward a “set-and-stay-safe” posture—secure, useful, and predictable for a century even if core developers stop intervening.
He frames this as a design philosophy built around ossifiability and cryptographic longevity, paired with concrete technical and economic requirements. The objective is to decouple Ethereum’s resilience from recurring human oversight and high-stakes governance cycles.
we lawyers called this the "Bahamas test" (can the team fuck off to the Bahamas, tech still works?)
most crypto teams, projects, chains, have abandoned it as "impractical," but if we can't meet it, we've only built new SaaS's on Rube Goldberg rails
believe in somETHing!!! https://t.co/a8CaWMWYyX
— _gabrielShapir0 (@lex_node) January 12, 2026
The “walkaway test” and the seven requirements
Buterin describes the target end-state as a network that behaves like a durable tool—“like owning a durable tool, such as a hammer”—where usefulness does not depend on its maker’s ongoing involvement. That metaphor signals a preference for stability and predictable operations over perpetual redesign.
To get there, he identifies seven tightly linked areas that must work together:
Ossifiability and protocol independence aim to define a stable core so future innovation happens through client upgrades and parameter tuning rather than disruptive rule changes. The practical intent is to reduce hard-fork dependency and lower governance and developer risk over time.
Post-quantum cryptography focuses on adopting quantum-resistant signature and hashing schemes to protect transaction authenticity and state integrity over decades. This is positioned as a long-horizon security migration rather than an optional feature add.
Scaling via ZK-EVM and PeerDAS targets higher throughput through verifiable computation and peer-to-peer data-availability sampling without pushing node requirements out of reach. The constraint is explicit: scaling has to preserve node accessibility, not trade it away.
Durable state architecture addresses state growth so “state bloat” does not price out new entrants or smaller validators. The operational goal is keeping full participation feasible as the chain ages.
A robust gas schedule aims to calibrate gas costs to reduce denial-of-service vectors and keep operational economics predictable, including interactions with advanced cryptographic proving systems. This is about making resource pricing reliable enough that the protocol remains defensible under stress.
Decentralized proof-of-stake emphasizes a staking model that resists concentration, supported by protocol measures such as enshrined proposer-builder separation (ePBS). The aim is to prevent a slow drift into structural centralization that would undermine neutrality.
Censorship-resistant block building seeks to reduce single-actor control over block contents to protect permissionless access and network neutrality. This is framed as a core survivability requirement, not a “nice to have.”
Institutional and operational implications
A hardened, more ossified core would reduce upgrade frequency and the operational burden of repeated protocol change, lowering integration risk for custody and settlement systems. In effect, stability becomes a risk-management feature that reduces change-control load over time.
A post-quantum migration, if implemented, would require coordinated key-management transitions and clear upgrade paths to satisfy custody and prudential expectations. This is not just a technical swap—it is a control-and-process redesign for key custody, rotation, and auditability.
Staking economics and anti-centralization measures affect prudential assessments for institutions running validators or offering staking services. Protocol changes that alter proposer and builder roles—such as ePBS—also have downstream impacts on market-abuse models, transaction monitoring, and segregation controls between custody, execution, and order-flow roles. When roles shift at the protocol level, internal control frameworks have to move with them.
Buterin also flags ecosystem sustainability, arguing that financial self-sufficiency for core infrastructure reduces dependence on ad hoc funding and changes the governance calculus for foundations and grants. For institutions, this matters because it impacts governance disclosures and the durability assumptions used in risk reporting.
Going forward, the proof points are the upgrades that operationalize these principles, including the Fusaka, Pectra, and Glamsterdam workstreams and progress in ZK-EVM and PeerDAS. These will be the practical tests of whether Ethereum can become stable, decentralized, and cryptographically durable without recurring high-risk intervention cycles.