LP-0010: Lux Patent-Pending Technology Portfolio

Abstract

This LP documents Lux Network's comprehensive portfolio of 100+ patent-pending technologies across eleven core blockchain segments:

Segment	Innovations	Competitive Moat
DEX	10	vs Hyperliquid, NASDAQ, Uniswap
Consensus	12	vs Ava-Labs, Ethereum
Threshold	9	vs Fireblocks, Utila
MPC	9	vs BitGo, Copper
TFHE	8	vs Zama, Inpher
AI Mining	6	vs NVIDIA, render networks
Post-Quantum Crypto	15	vs ALL (first-mover)
Bridge/Teleport	10	vs LayerZero, Wormhole
Wallet/KMS/HSM	13	vs Ledger, Fireblocks
EVM Precompiles	14	vs Ethereum, L2s
Enterprise Custody	8	vs institutional providers

Note: Hanzo AI infrastructure patents (25+ innovations) are documented separately in the Hanzo Patent Portfolio.

These innovations collectively enable "the fastest, most secure, and private quantum-safe network of blockchains."

All technologies are protected under the Lux Research License with Patent Reservation Version 1.0, which permits research and non-commercial use while reserving all patent rights and commercial licensing to Lux Industries Inc.

---

Licensing

Grant of Research License

Subject to the terms below, Lux Industries Inc grants:

• Non-commercial academic research
• Education and personal study
• Evaluation purposes
• Operation of nodes on Lux Network primary network (mainnet/testnet)
• Contribution of modifications back to original repositories

Commercial Use Restrictions

ALL COMMERCIAL USE REQUIRES SEPARATE LICENSE

Contact: [email protected]

This includes but is not limited to:

• Products or services offered for sale or fee
• Internal use by for-profit entities
• Revenue generation (direct or indirect)
• Competing custody, MPC, or threshold signature services
• Competing DEX, exchange, or trading platforms
• Competing blockchain networks or consensus systems

---

Part I: DEX Innovations (vs Hyperliquid/NASDAQ)

Repository: ~/work/lux/dex Lines of Code: 72,000+ Competitive Moat Against: Hyperliquid, NASDAQ, traditional exchanges

D1. Quantum-Resistant DAG Consensus with Hybrid BLS+Ringtail Signatures

Problem: Traditional DEX consensus uses classical signatures vulnerable to quantum attack. Existing post-quantum solutions sacrifice performance.

Innovation: Hybrid signature scheme combining BLS (fast aggregation) with Ringtail (post-quantum lattice-based) for dual-layer protection.

Files: consensus/pq.go, consensus/bls_ringtail_hybrid.go

Claims:

1. Hybrid signature aggregation combining classical BLS with post-quantum Ringtail for DEX finality
2. Quantum-resistant DAG consensus with sub-second finality for trading systems
3. Dual-signature scheme enabling graceful quantum transition

---

D2. Multi-Backend Hardware-Accelerated Order Matching

Problem: Software-only matching engines hit ~100K ops/sec limits. Hardware acceleration typically requires vendor lock-in.

Innovation: Unified interface supporting CPU, GPU, and FPGA backends achieving 434M ops/sec throughput.

Files: engine/matching/backend/, engine/matching/fpga/

Performance:

• CPU: 12M ops/sec
• GPU (CUDA): 180M ops/sec
• FPGA: 434M ops/sec

Claims:

1. Multi-backend matching engine abstraction for heterogeneous hardware acceleration
2. Lock-free order pool architecture with zero-allocation design
3. Hot-swappable backend selection based on workload characteristics

---

D3. FPGA-Accelerated Order Processing Pipeline

Problem: Traditional exchanges require complex networking protocols. HFT demands sub-microsecond latency.

Innovation: 48-byte wire protocol optimized for FPGA processing with deterministic latency.

Files: engine/matching/fpga/protocol.go, engine/matching/fpga/pipeline.go

Wire Protocol:

[Side:1][Type:1][Symbol:4][Price:8][Qty:8][OrderID:16][Flags:2][Reserved:8] = 48 bytes

Claims:

1. Fixed-width wire protocol for FPGA order processing with zero-copy parsing
2. Pipelined order validation with parallel price-time priority matching
3. Hardware-accelerated order book maintenance with deterministic latency

---

D4. Multi-Source Price Oracle with Q-Chain Quantum Finality Verification

Problem: Oracle manipulation is a major DeFi attack vector. Single-source oracles are unreliable.

Innovation: Aggregated price feeds from 10+ sources with quantum-finalized settlement via Q-Chain.

Files: oracle/multi_source.go, oracle/qchain_verification.go

Claims:

1. Multi-source price aggregation with outlier detection and median computation
2. Quantum-finalized price attestations for settlement finality
3. Oracle manipulation detection using statistical analysis and stake-weighted voting

---

D5. Three-Mode Margin Trading with Insurance Fund & ADL

Problem: Liquidation cascades cause massive losses. Existing margin systems lack sophisticated risk controls.

Innovation: Cross/Isolated/Portfolio margin modes with insurance fund and auto-deleveraging (ADL).

Files: margin/modes.go, margin/insurance_fund.go, margin/adl.go

Modes:

• Cross Margin: Shared collateral across positions
• Isolated Margin: Per-position collateral isolation
• Portfolio Margin: Risk-based netting with VaR calculation

Claims:

1. Three-mode margin architecture with dynamic mode switching
2. Insurance fund with contribution/drawdown algorithms for socialized loss
3. Auto-deleveraging (ADL) ranking system for counterparty selection

---

D6. Cross-Chain Bridge with Fraud Proofs and Liquidity Rebalancing

Problem: Cross-chain bridges are security vulnerabilities. Liquidity fragmentation across chains reduces capital efficiency.

Innovation: Optimistic bridge with fraud proof system and automated liquidity rebalancing.

Files: bridge/fraud_proofs.go, bridge/liquidity_rebalancing.go

Claims:

1. Optimistic bridge with challenge period and fraud proof verification
2. Automated liquidity rebalancing across chains based on demand patterns
3. Multi-collateral bridge security with dynamic threshold adjustment

---

Part II: Consensus Innovations (vs Ava-Labs/Avalanche)

Repository: ~/work/lux/consensus Lines of Code: 16,465 Competitive Moat Against: Ava-Labs, Avalanche, other L1 consensus

C1. Fast Probabilistic Consensus (FPC) - Dynamic Phase-Dependent Threshold Selection

Problem: Fixed consensus thresholds are suboptimal. Different phases of consensus require different thresholds for safety and liveness.

Innovation: PRF-based phase-dependent threshold selection that dynamically adjusts α parameter.

Files: protocol/wave/fpc/fpc.go

Formula: α = ⌈θ·k⌉ where θ ∈ [θ_min, θ_max], selected via SHA-256 PRF

Claims:

1. Phase-dependent threshold selection for consensus protocols using cryptographic PRF
2. Dynamic alpha parameter adjustment based on consensus round and network conditions
3. Provably secure threshold selection preventing adversarial manipulation

---

C2. Grouped Threshold Signatures - Scaling Post-Quantum to 10,000+ Validators

Problem: Post-quantum signatures are large (~2.5KB each). Aggregating 10,000 signatures is impractical for block headers.

Innovation: Hierarchical grouping of validators into committees with BLS+Ringtail aggregation at each level.

Files: protocol/quasar/grouped_signatures.go

Architecture:

10,000 validators → 100 groups (100 each) → BLS aggregate per group → 100 BLS sigs → Ringtail super-signature

Claims:

1. Hierarchical signature aggregation for scaling post-quantum consensus
2. Dynamic group formation based on stake and performance metrics
3. Multi-level aggregation with mixed classical/post-quantum signatures

---

C3. Luminance-Based Validator Selection - Performance-Weighted Participation Scoring

Problem: Random validator selection ignores performance. High-performing validators should be preferred.

Innovation: "Luminance" score combining uptime, latency, and correctness for weighted selection.

Files: protocol/photon/luminance.go

Score Calculation:

Luminance = Uptime × 0.4 + (1 - LatencyRatio) × 0.3 + CorrectnessRate × 0.3

Claims:

1. Performance-weighted validator selection using multi-dimensional scoring
2. Luminance metric combining uptime, latency, and correctness for consensus participation
3. Dynamic rebalancing of validator committees based on real-time performance

---

C4. Event Horizon Cross-Chain Finality - Quantum-Resistant Checkpoint Mechanism

Problem: Cross-chain finality requires trusted checkpoints. Quantum computers could forge classical signatures.

Innovation: "Event Horizon" checkpoints using quantum-resistant signatures for irrevocable finality.

Files: protocol/quasar/event_horizon.go, protocol/quasar/horizon.go

Claims:

1. Quantum-resistant checkpoint mechanism for cross-chain finality
2. Event horizon architecture with irreversible finality guarantees
3. Multi-chain coordination using shared quantum-safe checkpoints

---

C5. Hybrid BLS+Ringtail Consensus - Dual-Signature Post-Quantum Finality

Problem: Pure post-quantum consensus is slow. Pure classical consensus is vulnerable. Need graceful transition.

Innovation: Dual-signature scheme requiring both BLS and Ringtail for finality, enabling secure migration.

Files: protocol/quasar/hybrid.go, protocol/quasar/bls.go

Claims:

1. Hybrid consensus requiring both classical and post-quantum signature validity
2. Graceful quantum transition mechanism with configurable signature requirements
3. Dual-verification finality for defense-in-depth against quantum attack

---

C6. Epoch-Based Key Rotation for Post-Quantum Security

Problem: Long-lived keys are vulnerable to harvest-now-decrypt-later attacks. Key rotation is disruptive.

Innovation: Epoch-based automatic key rotation with seamless transition and backward compatibility.

Files: protocol/quasar/key_rotation.go

Claims:

1. Epoch-based automatic key rotation for post-quantum security
2. Seamless key transition without consensus downtime
3. Historical key verification for past transaction validation

---

C7. AI-Powered Consensus with Shared Hallucinations

Problem: Byzantine fault tolerance assumes adversarial behavior. AI validators could cooperate in novel ways.

Innovation: AI agents with "shared hallucinations" (distributed AI state) for cooperative block validation.

Files: ai/agent.go, ai/shared_hallucinations.go

Claims:

1. AI-powered consensus using distributed neural network state
2. Shared hallucination protocol for cooperative AI validator coordination
3. Evolutionary AI agents with on-chain governance of model parameters

---

C8. Modular Photon-Wave-Focus-Nova-Nebula-Quasar Architecture

Problem: Monolithic consensus engines are inflexible. Different workloads require different consensus properties.

Innovation: Physics-inspired modular architecture with pluggable consensus phases.

Files: protocol/photon/, protocol/wave/, protocol/focus/, protocol/nova/, protocol/nebula/, protocol/quasar/

Flow: Photon (proposal) → Wave (voting) → Focus (convergence) → Prism (DAG) → Horizon (finality) → Quasar (post-quantum seal)

Claims:

1. Modular consensus architecture with pluggable phase components
2. Physics-inspired naming and semantics for consensus phases
3. Hot-swappable consensus modules without network restart

---

Part III: Threshold Cryptography Innovations (vs Fireblocks/Utila)

Repository: ~/work/lux/threshold Competitive Moat Against: Fireblocks, Utila, other MPC/custody providers

T1. LSS (Lagrange Secret Sharing) Dynamic Resharing Without Key Reconstruction

Problem: Traditional threshold schemes require key reconstruction for resharing, exposing the key.

Innovation: Dynamic resharing using Lagrange interpolation at the polynomial level without ever reconstructing the key.

Files: protocols/lss/reshare.go, protocols/lss/lagrange.go

Claims:

1. Dynamic threshold secret resharing without key reconstruction
2. Polynomial-level Lagrange interpolation for share transformation
3. Zero-knowledge proofs for resharing correctness verification

---

T2. Multiplicative Blinding Protocols (Protocol I & II) for Share Privacy

Problem: Threshold operations leak information about individual shares through intermediate values.

Innovation: Two multiplicative blinding protocols that protect share privacy during computation.

Files: internal/mta/multiplicative_blinding.go

Protocol I: Share blinding with random masking Protocol II: Multiplication blinding with additive conversion

Claims:

1. Multiplicative blinding protocol for threshold computation privacy
2. Two-phase blinding with masking and conversion stages
3. Information-theoretic security for individual share protection

---

T3. Ringtail Post-Quantum Lattice-Based Threshold Signatures

Problem: Existing threshold signatures (ECDSA, Schnorr) are quantum-vulnerable. Post-quantum threshold is nascent.

Innovation: Lattice-based threshold signatures using Ringtail construction with efficient share verification.

Files: protocols/ringtail/

Claims:

1. Lattice-based threshold signature scheme for post-quantum security
2. Efficient verification of threshold signature shares
3. Ringtail construction with optimal communication complexity

---

T4. Threshold BIP-32 Deterministic Key Derivation

Problem: HD wallets use BIP-32, but threshold schemes don't support hierarchical derivation natively.

Innovation: Threshold-compatible BIP-32 derivation enabling HD wallet functionality with MPC.

Files: internal/bip32/threshold_derivation.go

Claims:

1. Threshold-compatible BIP-32 hierarchical deterministic key derivation
2. Distributed child key computation without key reconstruction
3. HD wallet functionality with multi-party security

---

T5. Identifiable Abort Protocol with Blame Assignment

Problem: Malicious parties can abort threshold protocols. Existing schemes cannot identify the culprit.

Innovation: Protocol with cryptographic proofs enabling identification of aborting parties.

Files: internal/round/identifiable_abort.go

Claims:

1. Identifiable abort protocol with cryptographic blame proofs
2. Automatic slashing/eviction of malicious parties
3. Round-by-round verification with accusation mechanism

---

T6. Automatic Generation-Based Rollback with Party Eviction

Problem: Protocol failures require manual intervention. Automated recovery is complex.

Innovation: Automatic rollback to last valid generation with eviction of faulty parties.

Files: protocols/lss/rollback.go

Claims:

1. Automatic generation-based rollback for threshold protocol recovery
2. Party eviction mechanism with stake slashing
3. Stateful recovery with checkpoint validation

---

T7. Advanced Zero-Knowledge Proof Suite (17 Systems)

Problem: Threshold protocols require many specialized ZK proofs. No unified framework exists.

Innovation: Comprehensive ZK proof suite covering all threshold protocol needs.

Files: pkg/zk/

Proof Systems:

1. Schnorr knowledge of discrete log
2. Pedersen commitment opening
3. Range proofs (Bulletproofs)
4. Paillier encryption proofs
5. ElGamal rerandomization
6. Multiplicative-to-additive (MtA) proofs
7. Share validity proofs
8. Resharing correctness proofs
9. And 9 additional specialized proofs...

Claims:

1. Unified ZK proof framework for threshold cryptography
2. Batched proof verification for protocol efficiency
3. Modular proof composition for complex statements

---

T8. Multi-Chain Adapter Pattern for 20+ Blockchain Support

Problem: Each blockchain has different signature requirements. Supporting multiple chains requires redundant code.

Innovation: Adapter pattern with chain-specific modules and unified interface.

Files: protocols/lss/adapters/

Supported Chains: XRPL, Ethereum, Bitcoin, Solana, TON, Cardano, Cosmos, Polkadot, BSC, NEAR, Aptos, Sui, Tezos, Algorand, Stellar, Hedera, Flow, Kadena, Mina, and more...

Claims:

1. Multi-chain adapter architecture for threshold signature schemes
2. Chain-specific signature encoding with unified API
3. Automatic chain detection and parameter selection

---

T9. Lamport One-Time Signatures for Safe Multisig

Problem: Quantum computers could forge ECDSA signatures used in Safe multisig. Lamport signatures are quantum-safe but single-use.

Innovation: Integration of Lamport OTS with Safe multisig for post-quantum security.

Files: See LP-105, node/vms/safe/lamport/

Claims:

1. Lamport OTS integration with smart contract multisig wallets
2. Key bundle management for one-time signature tracking
3. Dual-signature verification (ECDSA + Lamport) for transition period

---

Part IV: MPC Innovations (vs Fireblocks/BitGo)

Repository: ~/work/lux/mpc Competitive Moat Against: Fireblocks, BitGo, Utila, other custody providers

M1. Unified Multi-Protocol Signature Framework (CGGMP21 + FROST)

Problem: Different signature schemes (ECDSA, Schnorr) require different MPC protocols. Managing multiple protocols is complex.

Innovation: Unified framework supporting both CGGMP21 (ECDSA) and FROST (Schnorr/EdDSA) with shared infrastructure.

Files: pkg/mpc/framework.go

Claims:

1. Unified MPC framework for multiple signature scheme protocols
2. Shared communication layer for CGGMP21 and FROST
3. Dynamic protocol selection based on chain requirements

---

M2. Non-Disruptive Key Rotation with Public Key Invariance

Problem: Key rotation typically changes the public key, requiring address migration. This is disruptive for users.

Innovation: Resharing protocol that changes shares but preserves the public key and address.

Files: pkg/mpc/rotation.go

Claims:

1. Key rotation maintaining public key invariance
2. Share transformation without address migration
3. Gradual party replacement with continuous operation

---

M3. Incremental Encrypted Backup System with Watermark Synchronization

Problem: Full backup after every operation is expensive. Incremental backups risk inconsistency.

Innovation: Watermark-based incremental backup with encrypted state synchronization.

Files: pkg/kvstore/backup.go, pkg/kvstore/watermark.go

Claims:

1. Incremental encrypted backup using watermark synchronization
2. Cryptographic integrity verification for backup chain
3. Point-in-time recovery with minimal data transfer

---

M4. Byzantine-Resilient Node Coordination via Distributed Consensus Markers

Problem: MPC nodes need coordination but can't trust each other. Centralized coordinators are single points of failure.

Innovation: Distributed consensus markers for decentralized MPC coordination.

Files: pkg/messaging/coordination.go

Claims:

1. Byzantine-resilient MPC coordination using consensus markers
2. Decentralized session management without trusted coordinator
3. Atomic commitment for multi-party protocol phases

---

M5. Ed25519-Based Mutual Authentication Without PKI

Problem: Traditional PKI is complex and centralized. MPC nodes need mutual authentication without certificate authorities.

Innovation: Direct Ed25519 mutual authentication using node-generated keypairs.

Files: pkg/identity/ed25519_auth.go

Claims:

1. PKI-free mutual authentication using Ed25519 keypairs
2. Self-sovereign node identity management
3. Decentralized trust establishment via key commitment

---

M6. Session-Aware Party ID Versioning

Problem: Party IDs can collide across sessions. Reusing IDs from old sessions causes protocol confusion.

Innovation: Session-scoped party ID versioning with unique identifiers per protocol instance.

Files: pkg/party/versioning.go

Claims:

1. Session-aware party identification with version namespacing
2. Collision-resistant ID generation for MPC sessions
3. Historical session tracking for audit and replay protection

---

M7. KZen Format Translation Layer for Protocol Migration

Problem: Legacy MPC implementations use incompatible formats. Migration requires manual conversion.

Innovation: Automatic translation layer between KZen and modern protocol formats.

Files: pkg/mpc/kzen_translation.go

Claims:

1. Automatic format translation for MPC protocol migration
2. Legacy compatibility layer for KZen format support
3. Zero-downtime migration from legacy to modern protocols

---

M8. Dynamic Participant Set Management

Problem: Adding or removing MPC participants requires complex coordination. Set changes can interrupt operations.

Innovation: Dynamic participant management with hot-add and hot-remove capabilities.

Files: pkg/mpc/participant_management.go

Claims:

1. Dynamic participant set management for MPC clusters
2. Hot-add participant onboarding without interruption
3. Graceful participant removal with share redistribution

---

M9. Threshold Authentication and Quorum Enforcement

Problem: Standard authentication is all-or-nothing. Threshold authentication requires novel approaches.

Innovation: Quorum-based authentication requiring t-of-n participants for operations.

Files: pkg/mpc/quorum.go

Claims:

1. Threshold authentication for MPC operations
2. Configurable quorum policies per operation type
3. Dynamic quorum adjustment based on security requirements

---

Part V: TFHE Innovations (vs Zama/Inpher)

Repository: ~/work/lux/tfhe Competitive Moat Against: Zama, Inpher, other FHE providers

F1. Pure Go TFHE Implementation Without CGO Dependencies

Problem: Existing TFHE implementations (TFHE-rs, Concrete) require C/C++ and CGO, limiting cloud deployment and cross-compilation.

Innovation: Complete TFHE implementation in pure Go with zero CGO dependencies.

Files: tfhe/*.go, lattice/schemes/tfhe/*.go

Claims:

1. Pure Go implementation of TFHE programmable bootstrapping
2. Cross-platform FHE deployment without native code dependencies
3. Cloud-native FHE execution in managed runtime environments

---

F2. Deterministic FHE Random Number Generation for Blockchain Consensus

Problem: FHE requires random sampling but blockchain requires deterministic execution across all validators.

Innovation: SHA256-based deterministic PRNG seeded from blockchain state for reproducible FHE operations.

Files: tfhe/random.go

Claims:

1. Deterministic encrypted random value generation using cryptographic hash state machine
2. Blockchain-compatible FHE randomness with identical validator outputs
3. FHE operation seeding from blockchain state (block hash, transaction hash)

---

F3. Transaction-Batch Amortized Bootstrapping

Problem: Each FHE operation requires expensive bootstrapping (~13ms). Sequential processing is inefficient.

Innovation: Batch bootstrap keys across transactions in a block for amortized cost.

Files: fhe/src/binfhe/include/batch/binfhe-batch.h

Claims:

1. Cross-transaction bootstrap batching for GPU throughput saturation
2. DAG-based scheduler minimizing total bootstrap operations per block
3. FHE operation dependency analysis across multiple blockchain transactions

---

F4. Lazy Carry Propagation with Deterministic Noise Tracking

Problem: Radix integer arithmetic requires carry propagation via bootstrapping after every operation.

Innovation: Track noise accumulation deterministically and defer carries until threshold exceeded.

Files: fhe/src/binfhe/include/radix/radix.h

Claims:

1. Deterministic noise budget tracking using operation counting
2. Lazy carry propagation with configurable bootstrap threshold
3. Deferred FHE bootstrapping based on accumulated operation history

---

F5. Precompile Gas Metering for Variable-Cost FHE Operations

Problem: FHE operations have highly variable cost. Flat gas pricing enables DoS attacks.

Innovation: Dynamic gas pricing based on operation complexity and encrypted data type width.

Files: fhe/src/binfhe/include/fhevm/fhevm.cpp

Claims:

1. EVM gas cost computation based on encrypted data type width
2. Operation-specific gas formulae reflecting cryptographic complexity
3. Dynamic gas adjustment based on FHE coprocessor load

---

F6. Encrypted Index Private Information Retrieval

Problem: Smart contracts accessing encrypted arrays leak access patterns.

Innovation: FHE-native PIR using programmable bootstrapping with zero access pattern leakage.

Files: fhe/fhevm/pir.cpp (planned)

Claims:

1. Private information retrieval using FHE select operations
2. Batched CMUX evaluation for oblivious encrypted array access
3. Smart contract pattern for private array indexing

---

Part VI: AI Mining & Confidential Compute (vs NVIDIA/Render)

Repository: ~/work/lux/node, ~/work/lux/precompiles Competitive Moat Against: NVIDIA, Render Network, Akash

AI1. AI Mining Precompile with ML-DSA & NVTrust (0x0300)

Innovation: Quantum-safe ML-DSA signature verification integrated as native EVM precompile with NVTrust GPU attestation and privacy-tiered reward multipliers.

Files: precompiles/ai/ai_mining.go

Privacy Levels:

• Level 1 (Public): 0.25x multiplier
• Level 2 (Private): 0.50x multiplier
• Level 3 (Confidential): 1.00x multiplier
• Level 4 (Sovereign): 1.50x multiplier

Claims:

1. System for quantum-safe GPU compute verification on blockchain
2. Privacy-tiered reward calculation for confidential computing attestations
3. Native EVM precompile for FIPS 204 ML-DSA signature verification

---

AI2. TEE Integration (Intel SGX, AMD SEV, NVIDIA H100)

Innovation: Multi-provider TEE abstraction with attestation reports and cryptographic verification.

Files: hanzo/agent/extensions/tee/tee.py

Claims:

1. Unified abstraction over heterogeneous TEE providers
2. Remote attestation verification with code hash validation
3. Enclave state management for confidential AI inference

---

AI3. NVTrust GPU Attestation Chain Verification

Innovation: On-chain verification of NVIDIA confidential computing attestations with work proof deduplication.

Files: precompiles/ai/ai_mining.go

Claims:

1. NVIDIA H100 GPU attestation verification on blockchain
2. Work proof deduplication via BLAKE3 spent set tracking
3. TEE quote validation for decentralized AI compute

---

Part VII: Post-Quantum Cryptography Suite

Repository: ~/work/lux/crypto, ~/work/lux/lattice Competitive Moat Against: ALL competitors (first-mover advantage)

PQ1. ML-DSA (FIPS 204) - Digital Signatures

Innovation: Native NIST post-quantum signature verification with automatic security level detection.

Files: crypto/mldsa/mldsa.go

Variants: MLDSA44 (Level 2), MLDSA65 (Level 3), MLDSA87 (Level 5)

Claims:

1. Automatic security level detection from public key size
2. CGO-optimized with pure Go fallback
3. Native blockchain precompile integration

---

PQ2. ML-KEM (FIPS 203) - Key Encapsulation

Innovation: Post-quantum key encapsulation for encrypted cross-chain messaging.

Files: crypto/kem/mlkem.go

Variants: ML-KEM-512, ML-KEM-768, ML-KEM-1024

Claims:

1. Hybrid KEM factory with fallback implementations
2. Cross-chain bridge encryption with quantum resistance
3. Non-blocking KEM for missing liboqs installations

---

PQ3. SLH-DSA (FIPS 205) - Stateless Hash-Based Signatures

Innovation: 12 variants supporting speed/size tradeoffs without lattice assumptions.

Files: crypto/slhdsa/slhdsa.go

Claims:

1. Stateless construction (no nonce management)
2. SHA2/SHAKE dual-mode support
3. Time-speed-signature-size tradeoff selector

---

PQ4. Ringtail Lattice Threshold Signatures

Innovation: 2-round post-quantum threshold protocol with lattice assumptions.

Files: ringtail/threshold/threshold.go

Performance: 0.6s online phase, 2.5s total

Claims:

1. First production post-quantum threshold signatures
2. Hybrid BLS+Ringtail for dual-layer security
3. Module-LWE hardness assumptions

---

PQ5. Lamport One-Time Signatures for Safe

Innovation: Quantum-safe OTS with automatic key destruction.

Files: crypto/lamport/lamport.go

Claims:

1. Multi-hash-function OTS (SHA256, SHA512, SHA3)
2. Automatic key destruction after signing
3. Safe multisig integration for post-quantum

---

Part VIII: Bridge & Cross-Chain (vs LayerZero/Wormhole)

Repository: ~/work/lux/bridge, ~/work/lux/teleport Competitive Moat Against: LayerZero, Wormhole, Stargate, Across

B1. ClaimID-Based Replay Protection

Innovation: ECDSA malleability-immune replay protection using content-based claim IDs.

Files: teleport/contracts/Bridge.sol

Claims:

1. Content-based claim ID generation (not signature-based)
2. Immunity to ECDSA signature malleability attacks
3. Deterministic cross-chain message verification

---

B2. Destination-Committed Burn Events

Innovation: Oracle parameter spoofing prevention via destination binding in events.

Files: teleport/contracts/Bridge.sol

Claims:

1. Destination chain/address committed in burn event
2. Prevention of oracle parameter manipulation
3. Cryptographic binding of cross-chain intent

---

B3. Light Client Bridge Framework

Innovation: Heterogeneous chain verification using Ethereum beacon + Lux consensus.

Files: teleport/LLM.md

Claims:

1. Trustless cross-chain verification without oracles
2. Light client state proof validation
3. Multi-consensus bridge architecture

---

B4. Warp TeleportAttest with Threshold Signatures

Innovation: Cross-chain messaging with 67/100 validator threshold and optional quantum attachment.

Files: node/vms/platformvm/warp/contract.go

Claims:

1. BLS signature aggregation for message authentication
2. Optional post-quantum Ringtail attachment
3. Validator set rotation via height-indexed snapshots

---

Part IX: Wallet/KMS/HSM Enterprise Custody

Repository: ~/work/lux/wallet, ~/work/lux/safe Competitive Moat Against: Ledger, Fireblocks, BitGo

W1. Multi-Curve HD Wallet Framework

Innovation: Unified BIP32/BIP39 with encrypted keys supporting 28+ blockchains.

Files: wallet/packages/core/src/secret/

Claims:

1. Multi-curve support (secp256k1, nistp256, ed25519) with unified API
2. Batch key derivation with parent fingerprint tracking
3. SLIP-0010 ED25519 compliance with retry logic

---

W2. Air-Gap QR Protocol (UR Standard)

Innovation: Animated QR code fragmentation for hardware wallet communication.

Files: wallet/packages/qr-wallet-sdk/

Claims:

1. Air-gap transaction protocol via QR codes
2. Animated QR fragmentation/reassembly
3. UR encoding with CBOR serialization

---

W3. Social Recovery Module with Guardian Threshold

Innovation: Lost key recovery via trusted guardian consensus.

Files: safe/docs/content/docs/modules.mdx

Claims:

1. Guardian-based account recovery
2. Programmable recovery delay for intervention
3. Custody chain of authority hierarchy

---

W4. Allowance Module with Delegated Spending

Innovation: Employee/vendor spending limits without owner signatures.

Files: safe/docs/content/docs/modules.mdx

Claims:

1. Time-based periodic reset logic
2. Per-delegate, per-token allowances
3. Nonce-based replay protection

---

W5. EIP-7702 EOA Delegation Detection

Innovation: Bytecode-level detection of delegated account execution.

Files: safe/contracts/contracts/common/EIP7702.sol

Claims:

1. Runtime execution context identification
2. 0xef0100 magic byte detection
3. Forward-compatible account abstraction

---

Part X: EVM Precompiles & Infrastructure

Repository: ~/work/lux/evm, ~/work/lux/coreth, ~/work/lux/precompiles Competitive Moat Against: Ethereum, all L2s

EVM1. Singleton DEX Pool Manager (0x0400)

Innovation: All liquidity pools in single precompile with flash accounting.

Files: precompiles/dex/pool_manager.go

Performance: 443K swaps/sec, 2.26μs latency

Claims:

1. Singleton AMM architecture with global liquidity
2. Flash accounting for netted token settlement
3. Native blockchain token without wrapping

---

EVM2. Hooks System for Modular Pool Logic

Innovation: 12 hook points encoded in contract address bitmap.

Files: precompiles/dex/hooks.go

Claims:

1. Address-encoded hook capabilities (first 16 bits)
2. Dynamic fee adjustment via hooks
3. MEV protection via commit-reveal hooks

---

EVM3. FHE Precompile with Z-Chain Coprocessor

Innovation: Encrypted computation delegation to off-chain FHE coprocessor.

Files: precompiles/fhe/contract.go

Claims:

1. Ciphertext handle pointers to Z-Chain values
2. 23+ encrypted operations (add, sub, mul, compare, etc.)
3. Type-safe encrypted computation

---

EVM4. Ring Signature Precompile (LSAG)

Innovation: Privacy-preserving signatures with key image linkability.

Files: precompiles/ring/contract.go

Claims:

1. Linkable ring signatures for anonymous transactions
2. Key image computation for double-spend prevention
3. Batch verification with 20% gas discount

---

EVM5. Dynamic Fee Configuration (Triple Damping)

Innovation: Block gas cost + base fee + min floor for stable pricing.

Files: evm/commontype/fee_config.go, coreth/plugin/evm/header/gas_limit.go

Claims:

1. Triple damping mechanism (block rate, utilization, min price)
2. Validator incentive alignment via BlockGasCost
3. Fortuna upgrade dynamic capacity model

---

Part XI: Prosecution Strategy

Priority Matrix (Top 30 - Critical & High)

Innovation	Segment	Priority	Competitive Value
PQ4. Ringtail Threshold	Post-Quantum	🔴 Critical	First-mover (no competitor)
AI1. NVTrust GPU Attestation	AI Mining	🔴 Critical	vs NVIDIA/Render
EVM1. Singleton DEX Manager	EVM	🔴 Critical	vs Uniswap/all DEX
D2. Multi-Backend Matching	DEX	🔴 Critical	vs Hyperliquid/NASDAQ
D3. FPGA Pipeline	DEX	🔴 Critical	vs HFT venues
C1. FPC Threshold Selection	Consensus	🔴 Critical	vs Ava-Labs
C2. Grouped Threshold Sigs	Consensus	🔴 Critical	10K+ validators
T1. LSS Dynamic Resharing	Threshold	🔴 Critical	vs Fireblocks
M1. Unified Framework	MPC	🔴 Critical	vs BitGo/Utila
F1. Pure Go TFHE	TFHE	🔴 Critical	vs Zama
B3. Light Client Bridge	Bridge	🔴 Critical	vs LayerZero
W3. Social Recovery Module	Wallet	🔴 Critical	Enterprise custody
PQ1. ML-DSA (FIPS 204)	Post-Quantum	🟡 High	NIST standard
PQ2. ML-KEM (FIPS 203)	Post-Quantum	🟡 High	NIST standard
PQ3. SLH-DSA (FIPS 205)	Post-Quantum	🟡 High	NIST standard
AI2. TEE Multi-Provider	AI Mining	🟡 High	Intel/AMD/NVIDIA
EVM2. Hooks System	EVM	🟡 High	Modular DEX
EVM3. FHE Precompile	EVM	🟡 High	Z-Chain integration
EVM4. Ring Signature	EVM	🟡 High	Privacy
B1. ClaimID Replay Protection	Bridge	🟡 High	Security
B4. Warp TeleportAttest	Bridge	🟡 High	Cross-chain
W1. Multi-Curve HD Wallet	Wallet	🟡 High	28+ chains
W2. Air-Gap QR Protocol	Wallet	🟡 High	Hardware security
C5. Hybrid BLS+Ringtail	Consensus	🟡 High	Quantum transition
T5. Identifiable Abort	Threshold	🟡 High	Security
M2. Key Rotation	MPC	🟡 High	Enterprise
F2. Deterministic FHE RNG	TFHE	🟡 High	Blockchain FHE
F3. Batch Bootstrapping	TFHE	🟡 High	Performance

Note: See Hanzo Patent Portfolio for AI infrastructure priorities (H1-H6).

Recommended Filing Order

Phase 1 (Immediate - 30 days): Core differentiators

• PQ4: Ringtail threshold (FIRST - no competitor exists)
• AI1, AI2, AI3: AI mining + TEE
• EVM1, EVM2: DEX precompiles
• D2, D3: Hardware acceleration

Phase 2 (Q1 2025): Post-quantum & Consensus

• PQ1, PQ2, PQ3, PQ5: Full NIST PQ suite
• C1, C2, C5: Consensus innovations

Phase 3 (Q2 2025): Enterprise & Infrastructure

• W1-W5: Wallet/custody
• B1-B4: Bridge/cross-chain
• T1-T9: Threshold crypto
• M1-M9: MPC framework

Phase 4 (Q3 2025): Privacy & Advanced

• EVM3, EVM4: FHE + ring signatures
• F1-F6: TFHE innovations
• Additional EVM precompiles

Note: Hanzo AI infrastructure (H1-H6) follows separate filing timeline - see Hanzo Patent Portfolio.

---

Part XII: License Text Summary

All five repositories now include the Lux Research License with Patent Reservation Version 1.0:

Lux Research License with Patent Reservation
Version 1.0, December 2025

Copyright (c) 2020-2025 Lux Industries Inc.
All rights reserved.

PATENT PENDING TECHNOLOGY
Contact: oss@lux.network

This License grants RESEARCH USE only.
ALL PATENT RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSLY RESERVED.
Commercial use requires separate license from oss@lux.network.

OPEN AI PROTOCOL EXCEPTION:
Automatic license granted for:
(a) Operating nodes on Lux Network primary network (mainnet/testnet)
(b) Any network built on the Open AI Protocol - the primary consensus
    layer powering decentralized AI across Hanzo, Lux, Zoo, and all
    other Open AI chains
(c) Networks adopting PoAI (Proof of AI) consensus automatically qualify

This enables the open ecosystem of decentralized AI networks while
protecting against closed/proprietary commercial exploitation.

---

Related Documents

Lux LPs

• LP-8101: FHE Patent Strategy (related IP for Z-Chain)
• LP-105: Lamport One-Time Signatures for Safe
• LP-110: Quasar Consensus Protocol
• LP-200: Post-Quantum Cryptography Suite
• LP-7340: Threshold Cryptography Library
• LP-3001: Teleport Bridge MPC

External

• Hanzo Patent Portfolio: AI infrastructure patents (52 innovations)
  • LLM Router, MCP, Agent Frameworks, Compute Swarm, Jin Architecture, HMM
  • Zen-Agentic Dataset: 10.5B tokens (PRIVATE, Network Use License when released)
• Zoo Labs Innovations: Public goods (78 innovations, CC0)

---

Contact

For commercial licensing inquiries:

Lux Industries Inc. Email: [email protected] Subject: Patent License Request

---

Motivation

Lux Network's competitive advantage stems from a comprehensive portfolio of patent-pending innovations across every major blockchain segment. This document serves as the canonical reference for tracking these innovations, their status, and licensing terms.

Specification

This LP specifies the organizational structure and categorization of Lux Network's patent-pending technology portfolio. Each technology is categorized by:

• Segment (DEX, Consensus, Threshold, etc.)
• Innovation type
• Competitive positioning
• Filing status

Rationale

Documenting the patent portfolio in the LP format ensures:

1. Transparent disclosure to the community
2. Clear licensing terms
3. Version-controlled updates
4. Integration with the LP governance process

Backwards Compatibility

This LP is informational and does not affect network compatibility.

Security Considerations

Patent information is disclosed in accordance with patent office requirements. No security-sensitive implementation details are included that could compromise network security.

---

Copyright

All technologies described herein are © 2020-2025 Lux Industries Inc. All patent rights reserved.

---

Document prepared for Lux Industries Inc patent portfolio management. Last updated: 2025-12-27