// iota validator · starfish-one

An IOTA validator by longterm contributors

From the Tangle era to Starfish, starfish-one is run by long-term protocol contributors who stayed through the protocol transitions and now help secure the network.

0xd43ab2195b9db5e3cdbd7b12c8fcd1e74d7ca1a1d88e5fee1f301ddb683033ba
· · · · · · · · · · ·
why starfish-one

About this validator

① Low commission

starfish-one charges 3.14% commission. The network average is around 7%. That difference compounds over time.

② Stable commission history

Many validators launched at low commission and quietly raised to 10%. starfish-one has been at π% since launch. Any future change will be communicated in advance.

③ Monitored infrastructure

The node is monitored continuously. Health issues are investigated when they appear, and operational status is tracked since mainnet launch.

④ Stake distribution

Most IOTA stake sits with a few large operators. Distributing stake across more validators makes the network measurably more fault-tolerant.

· · · · · · · · · · ·
background

Longterm protocol contributors running a validator

starfish-one is operated by people who have been contributing to IOTA's protocol development for years — across consensus research, node software, infrastructure, and developer tooling. The motivation is straightforward: people who understand a protocol deeply should also help secure it.

Consensus research

The team behind starfish-one has been close to the protocol work around Starfish and the broader IOTA consensus transition. The liveness questions, the pacemaker, the erasure-coded dissemination strategy.

Years of core development

Across multiple protocol generations, contributors behind starfish-one have shipped node software, networking layers, indexing pipelines, and developer SDKs that the IOTA ecosystem runs on today.

Long-term commitment

starfish-one grew out of years of involvement in IOTA through its hardest transitions — not just the hype cycles. A validator built to last, not to flip.

commission.log
Many validators launched at low commission then quietly raised to 10%. starfish-one's commission has been π% from the start. If it ever changes, delegators will know first.
Loading commission comparison…
· · · · · · · · · · ·
operations

Validator operation and monitoring

Validator security is not just a hardware question. It includes monitoring node health, following protocol changes, understanding failure modes, and responding when conditions degrade.

starfish-one — status
operations.log
Distributed systems do not stay secure by hardware alone. They stay secure when operators monitor carefully, understand protocol changes, push for better decentralization, and explain the system clearly enough that others can reason about it too.
· · · · · · · · · · ·
how to delegate

How delegation works

IOTA uses Delegated Proof-of-Stake. Delegated tokens never leave the delegator's wallet. The steps below link to external tools where delegation happens.

01

Compare validators

Open IOTAScan or the IOTA wallet. Look at commission, uptime, and who runs the node.

02

Choose deliberately

Compare commission, operating history, and stake distribution. A large share of currently staked IOTA already sits with the biggest validators, so validator choice still matters for decentralization.

03

Delegate and monitor

Delegate your IOTA to the validator you choose. Your tokens stay in your wallet. Then keep checking validator status, rewards, and any commission changes over time.

IOTA Wallet & Staking docs →View on IOTAScan
· · · · · · · · · · ·
the protocol

What is Starfish and why does it matter?

IOTA currently runs Mysticeti — a fast DAG-based consensus where validators propose blocks in parallel and finalize in three rounds. It works well under good conditions. But recent research exposed a critical flaw: no rigorous liveness proof. Worse — an explicit desynchronization attack was demonstrated that could permanently stall honest validators.

Starfish fixes this. It's the first uncertified DAG protocol with a complete mathematical liveness proof. The new Push pacemaker closes the attack vector. Reed-Solomon erasure coding cuts bandwidth from O(n²) to O(n). Data Availability Certificates form directly on the DAG. Implemented in Rust, benchmarked at 200–300K TPS with sub-second latency, and is the planned IOTA Mainnet upgrade.

Read the paperConsensus docsSource code
consensus illustration

An illustration of the commit rule from the paper. 5 rounds, proposal to finality.

Loading interactive illustration…
the evolution
mysticeti
starfish
Liveness
No formal proof
First formal proof for uncertified DAGs
Attack surface
Desync attack demonstrated
Push pacemaker closes the vector
Bandwidth
O(n²) per payload
O(n) via Reed-Solomon erasure coding
DA Certs
External mechanism
Formed directly on the DAG
Throughput
~100K TPS
200–300K TPS, sub-second latency
Mysticeti laid the foundation. Starfish makes it provably safe.
· · · · · · · · · · ·
faq

Common questions