Overview
Puffer Finance launched in 2024 as a liquid restaking protocol with a unique technical angle: Secure-Signer, an anti-slashing technology that uses Intel SGX trusted execution environments (TEEs) to prevent validators from signing conflicting messages that would trigger slashing penalties. This addresses one of the most significant risks in restaking — the potential for restaked ETH to be slashed due to operator error or malicious behavior.
Users deposit ETH into Puffer and receive pufETH, a liquid restaking token. The deposited ETH is staked on Ethereum and restaked on EigenLayer through Puffer's node operator set. Puffer's node operators run the Secure-Signer enclave alongside their validator software, providing hardware-level slashing protection.
Puffer also introduced UniFi, an Ethereum-based rollup infrastructure using restaking for sequencing and pre-confirmations. This broader vision extends Puffer beyond simple liquid restaking into rollup infrastructure, though UniFi is early-stage.
The protocol raised $18M from investors including Brevan Howard, Coinbase Ventures, and Binance Labs. Puffer was incubated at the Ethereum Foundation, lending credibility to its technical approach.
Smart Contracts
pufETH Architecture
Puffer's contracts manage ETH deposits, pufETH minting, EigenLayer delegation, and node operator management. The architecture separates the liquid token layer (pufETH) from the operational layer (node operation, restaking management). An ERC-4626 vault interface provides standard DeFi composability.
Secure-Signer Integration
The Secure-Signer is not a smart contract but a TEE-based software module run by node operators. It prevents the signing of slashable messages at the hardware level, providing stronger guarantees than software-only protections. The smart contract layer enforces Secure-Signer requirements for node operators.
Code Quality
Puffer's contracts are well-designed with Ethereum Foundation-grade engineering standards. The team includes researchers with deep Ethereum protocol knowledge, and the codebase reflects this technical sophistication.
Security
Anti-Slashing Innovation
Puffer's primary security differentiator is Secure-Signer. In standard staking, a validator can be slashed if it signs two conflicting blocks (equivocation) or surrounds a previous attestation. Secure-Signer prevents these actions at the hardware level — the TEE enclave refuses to sign messages that would trigger slashing conditions. This provides the strongest slashing protection available in the restaking ecosystem.
TEE Limitations
Secure-Signer relies on Intel SGX, which has known side-channel vulnerabilities. While these vulnerabilities are difficult to exploit in practice (especially for slashing attacks), they represent a theoretical security limitation. The TEE dependency also limits operator hardware options to SGX-capable processors.
Audit History
Puffer has been audited by BlockSec, SlowMist, Certora, and through competitive audits. The Secure-Signer component has undergone separate security review. The dual audit scope (smart contracts + TEE module) reflects the protocol's multi-layer architecture.
Track Record
Puffer has operated without a major exploit since launch. pufETH has maintained a tight peg to ETH without significant depeg events. The Secure-Signer has performed as designed, with no slashing incidents among Puffer-operated validators.
Decentralization
Permissionless Node Operators
Puffer aims to enable permissionless node operation with reduced collateral requirements. Standard Ethereum validators require 32 ETH; Puffer allows operators to run validators with lower bonds (as low as 1-2 ETH) because the Secure-Signer dramatically reduces slashing risk. This lower barrier to entry supports validator decentralization.
Operator Diversity
The lower bond requirements attract a more diverse set of node operators, potentially including home stakers and smaller operators who cannot afford 32 ETH bonds. This diversity is aligned with Ethereum's decentralization goals.
Governance
Puffer governance is transitioning toward decentralization through its token holders. The team retains significant influence during the early phase, which is standard for recently launched protocols.
Adoption
TVL & Growth
Puffer's TVL has been moderate, typically $200M-$1B. Growth during the points farming era was significant, but post-airdrop normalization has occurred. Puffer's TVL is smaller than market leaders (EtherFi, Renzo) but meaningful within the LRT space.
Market Differentiation
The Secure-Signer technology differentiates Puffer technically, but the market has not strongly rewarded this differentiation in TVL terms. Users have primarily chosen LRT protocols based on points/airdrop potential rather than anti-slashing technology — a frustrating reality for a protocol with genuine technical merit.
DeFi Integration
pufETH is integrated into major DeFi protocols as collateral and in liquidity pools. The ERC-4626 compatibility enables broad integration. Pendle markets for pufETH yield exist, providing additional utility.
Tokenomics
PUFFER Token
The PUFFER token launched with governance and utility functions. Distribution includes community allocation, team, investors, and ecosystem development. The token's primary utility is governance participation and protocol incentive direction.
Revenue Model
Puffer earns fees on staking and restaking rewards processed through the protocol. The UniFi rollup infrastructure, if successful, could provide additional revenue streams. Current revenue is modest, reflecting the early-stage AVS reward ecosystem.
Early-Stage Economics
Like all LRT protocol tokens, PUFFER's value proposition depends on the maturation of the restaking economy and Puffer's ability to capture meaningful market share within it.
Risk Factors
- TEE dependency: Reliance on Intel SGX introduces hardware vendor dependency and potential side-channel vulnerability exposure.
- Restaking ecosystem maturity: The value of anti-slashing technology depends on slashing risk being material. If AVS slashing is rare, Puffer's differentiator has limited practical value.
- Adoption vs. technology: Market adoption has favored larger LRT protocols over technically differentiated ones, suggesting TVL growth depends on factors beyond Secure-Signer.
- EigenLayer dependency: Like all LRT protocols, Puffer depends on EigenLayer's success for its core value proposition.
- UniFi execution risk: The broader rollup infrastructure vision is ambitious and early-stage, adding execution risk to the protocol's roadmap.
- Hardware requirements: Secure-Signer's SGX requirement limits operator hardware choices and may constrain the node operator set.
Conclusion
Puffer Finance is one of the most technically differentiated protocols in the liquid restaking space. The Secure-Signer anti-slashing technology addresses a real and important risk in restaking, and the lower bond requirements for operators support Ethereum's decentralization goals. The team's Ethereum Foundation pedigree and research-oriented approach inspire confidence in the technical foundations.
The 6.0 score reflects strong technical design and security innovation, balanced against modest adoption relative to LRT competitors, early-stage tokenomics, and the broader restaking ecosystem uncertainty. Puffer deserves recognition for building genuine technology rather than purely optimizing for TVL through incentive mechanics. The market may eventually reward this approach, but as of early 2026, adoption has not yet matched the protocol's technical merit.