Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper conducts a systematization of knowledge on cross-chain transaction identification and matching, addressing the complexities of analyzing transactions that span multiple blockchain systems. By classifying identification methods into four approaches and matching methods into three mechanisms, the authors reveal how the performance of these techniques is heavily influenced by the evidence available from the underlying systems. The study also highlights significant gaps in existing datasets and outlines key challenges for advancing cross-chain analysis, emphasizing the need for improved methodologies in this critical area of cryptocurrency security.
Cross-chain transactions are a goldmine for attackers, yet existing methods struggle to keep pace with their complexity and variability.
Cross-chain bridges, instant cryptocurrency exchanges, and centralized cross-ledger platforms move assets across an increasingly multi-chain ecosystem. However, these systems have repeatedly become targets of high-value attacks and channels for cross-chain money laundering. Cross-chain transactions are substantially harder to analyze than single-chain transactions: no single ledger records an entire cross-chain transfer, its evidence is scattered across the source chain, the destination chain, and off-chain systems, and the availability and reliability of that evidence vary widely across systems. In this paper, we present a systematization of knowledge (SoK) on cross-chain transaction identification and matching. First, we classify deposit and withdrawal identification methods into four approaches and transaction matching methods into three mechanisms: deterministic identifier matching, field-constraint heuristics, and model-assisted matching. We find that their applicability and reported performance are shaped mainly by the evidence the underlying system exposes, and we further examine how matched pairs support downstream attack detection and fund tracing. Second, we assess the availability of existing datasets and artifacts, finding that fewer than half remain obtainable, and distill three artifact failure modes. Finally, we outline four open challenges toward auditable, reproducible, and actionable cross-chain analysis.
