Curriculum·G401 Custody Operations and Key Ceremonies·about 31 min

MPC and the shape of key material

By the end of this lesson you can

  • →Explain what multi-party computation custody does: sign jointly from key shares, with no full key ever assembled
  • →Explain how the TSSHOCK disclosures showed flawed MPC implementations could leak the whole key
  • →Compute how MPC removes the single stored key but moves the risk to the protocol's correctness
  • →Weigh MPC against multisig by where each puts its trust

Graduate · enrolled learners

This lesson opens with TSSHOCK threshold-signature disclosures, 2023.

What happened
Multi-party computation custody splits a private key into shares held by different parties and has them compute a signature jointly, so the whole key is never assembled anywhere, not at generation, not at signing. Many institutions, including banks, exchanges and custodians, rely on it, because it removes the single place a full key could sit. But the joint signing is a cryptographic protocol, and its security depends on that protocol being implemented correctly. In August 2023, at Black Hat USA, researchers at Verichains disclosed a set of vulnerabilities they called TSSHOCK in widely used threshold-signature libraries, implementations of the protocols that MPC wallets and custodians relied on, in which a malicious participant could exploit implementation flaws to recover the full private key from the honest parties' shares. No headline theft is attached; the disclosure is the lesson. MPC had removed the single stored key and replaced it with a promise that the joint-signing math was implemented soundly, and that promise, in several popular libraries, was not kept.
The decision point
MPC changes the shape of key material, and understanding custody means understanding where that change moves the risk rather than treating MPC as simply safer. In a single-key or multisig scheme, a full key or several full keys exist and can be stolen; MPC's advance is that no full key is ever assembled, so there is no single secret to steal at rest. That is a real gain. But it is not risk removed, it is risk relocated: the security now rests on the correctness of the cryptographic protocol that lets the shares sign without combining, and TSSHOCK showed that when that protocol is implemented wrongly, a malicious participant can reconstruct the very key MPC promised never existed. So the honest comparison is by where each model puts its trust. Multisig trusts several independent key holders and their key management. MPC trusts the soundness of a subtle cryptographic implementation. Neither is safe in the abstract; each is safe only where the thing it trusts actually holds, and an institution chooses knowing which trust it is taking on.

What you will be able to answer

  • →What does MPC custody do?
  • →What did TSSHOCK show?
  • →How does MPC relocate risk?
  • →How do you compare MPC and multisig?

Orientation and Year One are open: anyone can read them without an account. From Year Two onward the lessons are for enrolled learners, because progress through the later years only means anything if it is tracked against a record.

It is free. We do not sell the list and there is nothing to buy at the end of it.

Terms used here

Sources and review

Confidence medium·Volatility medium·Reviewed 2026-09-16·Owner unassigned

Contested

TSSHOCK was released by Verichains at Black Hat USA on August 10, 2023, after private reports to affected projects from December 2022, and covered specific implementations of the GG18, GG20 and CGGMP21 threshold-ECDSA protocols. Not all were patched: Verichains listed BNB Chain tss-lib, Multichain, Swingby, Taurus, THORChain and Threshold Network as fixed, Axelar and ING Bank as not yet fixed, and ZenGo-X multi-party-ecdsa as won't fix, its maintainer saying the code was not used in production; it could not disclose the status of some proprietary vendors under NDA. A day earlier, on August 9, 2023, Fireblocks disclosed a separate set of flaws it called BitForge in GG18, GG20 and Lindell17 implementations used by more than 15 wallet providers, blockchains and open-source projects. The claim that a single malicious party can extract the key after one or two signatures is Verichains' own, demonstrated in its proof-of-concept exploits. The lesson uses it for the general point that MPC's security rests on implementation correctness, not to claim MPC is broken.

MPC and multisig each have many variants with different trust and operational trade-offs; this lesson compares them at the level of where each locates its core trust, not as a ranking.