Comparing PoS to DPoS, both consensus mechanisms offer sound systems when it comes to security. However, they have different approaches and vulnerabilities.
Security in PoS:
In PoS, the validators are selected with regard to the amount of cryptocurrency they stake. Validators have skin in the game by virtue of holding stake, incentivizing them to be honest: any malicious intent, a desire to double-spend-will result in slashing, an event wherein part or all of the stake is confiscated. PoS networks are secure because an attack would be economically infeasible: the mere act of a 51% attack on such systems requires an attacker to hold the majority of staked tokens, very often prohibitively costly.
Security in DPoS:
DPoS introduces the layer of delegation, whereby token holders vote for a small group of trusted delegates that validate the set of transactions. In general, this approach makes the system faster and more efficient compared to straightforward Nakamoto consensus but introduces centralization risk-if few powerful active delegates win the vote, they may collude or act maliciously. However, one safeguard in DPoS is that ill-behaving delegates can be replaced by token holders, thus keeping them accountable.
Comparison:
Where PoS is more decentralized and resistant to centralization in general, DPoS trades some decentralization for efficiency. In that regard, DPoS can be called more sensitive to risks of centralization, yet its dynamic election process helps neutralize the potential security concerns to a great extent. Both mechanisms rely strongly on economic incentives as a means of ensuring network security.
Thanks
~ Nesaty
PoS vs DPoS security is a great post.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit