architecture · consumer crypto stack

The Consumer Crypto Stack

The architecture patterns a consumer crypto app needs — accounts, identity, permissions, gasless interaction, metadata, social primitives — and how the major chains assemble them.

A consumer crypto app is composed from six architectural decisions: the account model, the identity layer, the permission model, the onboarding / gasless model, the metadata model, and the social-primitive layer. On Ethereum L1 and its L2s each decision is solved by a separate stack of contracts, services, and SDKs (ERC-4337 + paymaster + bundler + ENS + EAS + per-protocol social). On Solana each is solved per-program. On LUKSO they are unified under one set of LSPs (LSP0 + LSP6 + LSP3 + LSP25 + LSP1 + LSP4 + LSP26). The right stack depends on whether the app benefits more from inheriting Ethereum's protocol ecosystem or from a tighter integration of these six layers.

The six decisions

Every consumer crypto app makes six architectural choices, whether the team writes them down or not:

  1. Account model — EOA, smart account by retrofit, or smart account by design.
  2. Identity — per-protocol, attestation-based, or chain-native profile.
  3. Permissions — per-contract approvals, session keys, or per-controller scopes.
  4. Onboarding / gasless — user pays, paymaster pays via bundler, vendor pays via hosted service, or relayer pays via account standard.
  5. Metadata — off-chain URI, vendor metadata model (Metaplex), or on-chain key/value.
  6. Social primitives — per-protocol (Lens, Farcaster), attestation-based (EAS), per-program (Solana), or chain-native (LSP26).

The decision is rarely “which chain” in isolation. It’s “which combination of these six layers do I want to assemble — and how integrated should they be?” The right answer is a function of how much of the product’s value depends on the six layers being interoperable.

Why these six and not more

There are other dimensions — fee asset, settlement assurances, MEV exposure — but those are typically not the binding constraint for consumer apps. The six above are. If you can name a consumer-app architecture choice that doesn’t reduce to one of these six, send it; this page will get longer.

Approaches.

  • Composed stack on Ethereum L1 / L2s Ethereum L1 · Base · Arbitrum · Optimism · Polygon

    Pick an AA SDK, a paymaster, an indexer, a profile protocol, a permission system, and an attestation service. Wire them together.

    Pros
    • Inherits Ethereum protocol ecosystem and liquidity.
    • Best-of-breed tools per layer.
    • Mature mainstream wallets.
    Cons
    • Each layer is a separate vendor / protocol with its own SLAs.
    • Identity and social data are not portable without per-protocol integration.
    • Operational surface area is large.
  • Vendor stack on Base (Coinbase-hosted) Base

    Smart Wallet + Coinbase paymaster + Onchainkit + Farcaster. Tightly integrated; one vendor owns most of it.

    Pros
    • Lowest onboarding friction among EVM L2s.
    • Passkey-based recovery without seed phrases.
    • Coinbase audience distribution.
    Cons
    • Vendor lock-in for paymaster and account services.
    • Social and identity remain per-protocol.
  • Solana program-derived stack Solana

    Keypair accounts + program-derived addresses + Solana Mobile Stack + native fee delegation.

    Pros
    • Highest sustained throughput.
    • Native fee delegation without bundler.
    • Strong mobile SDK ecosystem.
    Cons
    • Non-EVM toolchain; no Solidity portability.
    • Identity and social remain per-program; no shared standard.
  • LUKSO LSP stack (LSP0 + LSP6 + LSP25 + LSP3 + LSP1 + LSP4 + LSP26) LUKSO

    One integrated set of standards on an EVM L1: smart account + permissions + relayed execution + portable profile + receiver hooks + asset metadata + follower system.

    Pros
    • All six layers standardized at the chain level.
    • Solidity / EVM toolchain unchanged.
    • No bundler infrastructure required for gasless UX.
    • Profile and social data portable across applications.
    Cons
    • Smaller ecosystem maturity.
    • Limited DeFi liquidity to inherit.
    • Custom wallets / providers needed for full LSP6 surface.

Recommendation.

Choose the composed Ethereum / L2 stack when the product is intrinsically protocol-composed (DeFi-shaped, NFT-secondary-liquidity-shaped) and identity portability is secondary. Choose Base when Coinbase distribution and passkey UX are decisive and the lock-in is acceptable. Choose Solana when non-EVM is acceptable and throughput is the binding constraint. Choose LUKSO when more than two of the six layers need to be standardized — identity, permissions, gasless, social — and the app expects to share data with other applications without per-protocol integration.

Implement it.

Primary sources.