The design of OP_VAULT on the time of writing (April 2023) appears to be in flux and is not but finalized however like OP_CTV it is not a recursive covenant opcode and therefore should not pose a community threat or a DoS vector to a node verifying OP_VAULT guidelines (assuming it was activated on mainnet).
The axis that’s extra related to those extra restricted covenant opcodes is the utility axis fairly than the protection axis i.e. when in comparison with competing options (SIGHASH_ANYPREVOUT, OP_TLUV, OP_TXHASH and OP_CHECKSIGFROMSTACKVERIFY and so on) is that this the optimum proposal for enabling this type of performance? The design area for opcodes may be very giant and we won’t/should not allow each single potential opcode on mainnet. For extra rationalization on why see this publish. Therefore the main threat right here might be that nobody would find yourself utilizing it particularly if an alternate superior proposal was activated a while later. And having a barely inferior proposal energetic onchain might influence whether or not that different superior proposal finally ends up getting activated in any respect. Therefore there are many components to contemplate and assuming we do not wish to clog up the consensus guidelines with plenty of unused opcodes we must be extraordinarily selective on what we find yourself activating on mainnet (ignoring the activation chain break up dangers which can be current with each tried activation).
There are dangers and trade-offs when assessing whether or not to make use of a selected vault design that might influence the utilization of a covenant opcode like OP_VAULT. A few of the dangers of utilizing the Revault vault design are mentioned right here. Nevertheless, these aren’t systemic dangers to the community, simply dangers to the consumer of a selected vault design.