Document Open Access Logo

Byzantine Connectivity Testing in the Congested Clique

Authors John Augustine , Anisur Rahaman Molla , Gopal Pandurangan , Yadu Vasudev



PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.DISC.2022.7.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.85 MB
  • 21 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

John Augustine
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India
Anisur Rahaman Molla
  • Indian Statistical Institute, Kolkata, India
Gopal Pandurangan
  • Department of Computer Science, University of Houston, TX, USA
Yadu Vasudev
  • Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India

Cite AsGet BibTex

John Augustine, Anisur Rahaman Molla, Gopal Pandurangan, and Yadu Vasudev. Byzantine Connectivity Testing in the Congested Clique. In 36th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC 2022). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 246, pp. 7:1-7:21, Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2022.7

Abstract

We initiate the study of distributed graph algorithms under the presence of Byzantine nodes. We consider the fundamental problem of testing the connectivity of a graph in the congested clique model in a Byzantine setting. We are given a n-vertex (arbitrary) graph G embedded in a n-node congested clique where an arbitrary subset of B nodes of the clique of size up to (1/3-ε)n (for any arbitrary small constant ε > 0) can be Byzantine. We consider the full information model where Byzantine nodes can behave arbitrarily, collude with each other, and have unlimited computational power and full knowledge of the states and actions of the honest nodes, including random choices made up to the current round. Our main result is an efficient randomized distributed algorithm that is able to correctly distinguish between two contrasting cases: (1) the graph G⧵ B (i.e., the graph induced by the removal of the vertices assigned to the Byzantine nodes in the clique) is connected or (2) the graph G is far from connected, i.e., it has at least 2|B|+1 connected components. Our algorithm runs in O(polylog n) rounds in the congested clique model and guarantees that all honest nodes will decide on the correct case with high probability. Since Byzantine nodes can lie about the vertices assigned to them, we show that this is essentially the best possible that can be done by any algorithm. Our result can be viewed also in the spirit of property testing, where our algorithm is able to distinguish between two contrasting cases while giving no guarantees if the graph falls in the grey area (i.e., neither of the cases occur). Our work is a step towards robust and secure distributed graph computation that can output meaningful results even in the presence of a large number of faulty or malicious nodes.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Distributed algorithms
  • Mathematics of computing → Probabilistic algorithms
  • Mathematics of computing → Discrete mathematics
Keywords
  • Byzantine protocols
  • distributed graph algorithms
  • congested clique
  • graph connectivity
  • fault-tolerant computation
  • randomized algorithms

Metrics

  • Access Statistics
  • Total Accesses (updated on a weekly basis)
    0
    PDF Downloads

References

  1. A. Andoni, Z. Song, C. Stein, Z. Wang, and P. Zhong. Parallel graph connectivity in log diameter rounds. In Proc. IEEE FOCS, pages 674-685, 2018. Google Scholar
  2. John Augustine, Valerie King, Anisur Rahaman Molla, Gopal Pandurangan, and Jared Saia. Scalable and secure computation among strangers: Message-competitive byzantine protocols. In 34th International Symposium on Distributed Computing, DISC 2020, October 12-16, 2020, Virtual Conference, volume 179 of LIPIcs, pages 31:1-31:19. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2020. Google Scholar
  3. Paul Beame, Paraschos Koutris, and Dan Suciu. Communication steps for parallel query processing. J. ACM, 64(6):40:1-40:58, 2017. Google Scholar
  4. Michael Ben-Or, Elan Pavlov, and Vinod Vaikuntanathan. Byzantine agreement in the full-information model in o(log n) rounds. In Proc. of the 38th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pages 179-186, 2006. Google Scholar
  5. Elette Boyle, Shafi Goldwasser, and Stefano Tessaro. Communication locality in secure multi-party computation - how to run sublinear algorithms in a distributed setting. In Proc. of the 10th Theory of Cryptography Conference (TCC), pages 356-376, 2013. Google Scholar
  6. Keren Censor-Hillel, Eldar Fischer, Gregory Schwartzman, and Yadu Vasudev. Fast distributed algorithms for testing graph properties. Distributed Comput., 32(1):41-57, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00446-018-0324-8.
  7. Artur Czumaj, Peter Davies, and Merav Parter. Simple, deterministic, constant-round coloring in the congested clique. Proceedings of the 39th Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, July 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3382734.3405751.
  8. Danny Dolev, Michael J. Fischer, Robert J. Fowler, Nancy A. Lynch, and H. Raymond Strong. An efficient algorithm for byzantine agreement without authentication. Inf. Control., 52(3):257-274, 1982. Google Scholar
  9. Guy Even, Orr Fischer, Pierre Fraigniaud, Tzlil Gonen, Reut Levi, Moti Medina, Pedro Montealegre, Dennis Olivetti, Rotem Oshman, Ivan Rapaport, and Ioan Todinca. Three notes on distributed property testing. In Andréa W. Richa, editor, 31st International Symposium on Distributed Computing, DISC 2017, October 16-20, 2017, Vienna, Austria, volume 91 of LIPIcs, pages 15:1-15:30. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2017.15.
  10. Pesech Feldman and Silvio Micali. An optimal probabilistic protocol for synchronous byzantine agreement. SIAM J. Comput., 26(4):873-933, 1997. Google Scholar
  11. Pierre Fraigniaud and Dennis Olivetti. Distributed detection of cycles. ACM Trans. Parallel Comput., 6(3):12:1-12:20, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3322811.
  12. R. G. Gallager, P. A. Humblet, and P. M. Spira. A distributed algorithm for minimum-weight spanning trees. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 5(1):66-77, January 1983. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/357195.357200.
  13. Mohsen Ghaffari and Merav Parter. MST in log-star rounds of congested clique. In George Giakkoupis, editor, Proceedings of the 2016 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 2016, Chicago, IL, USA, July 25-28, 2016, pages 19-28. ACM, 2016. Google Scholar
  14. S. Gilbert and L. Li. How fast can you update your MST. In Proc. ACM SPAA, pages 531-533, 2020. Google Scholar
  15. Oded Goldreich. Introduction to Property Testing. Cambridge University Press, 2017. URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108135252.
  16. Oded Goldreich, Shafi Goldwasser, and Dana Ron. Property testing and its connection to learning and approximation. J. ACM, 45(4):653-750, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/285055.285060.
  17. James W. Hegeman, Gopal Pandurangan, Sriram V. Pemmaraju, Vivek B. Sardeshmukh, and Michele Scquizzato. Toward optimal bounds in the congested clique: Graph connectivity and MST. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC 2015, Donostia-San Sebastián, Spain, July 21 - 23, 2015, pages 91-100. ACM, 2015. Google Scholar
  18. Tomasz Jurdzinski and Krzysztof Nowicki. MST in O(1) rounds of congested clique. In Artur Czumaj, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2018, New Orleans, LA, USA, January 7-10, 2018, pages 2620-2632. SIAM, 2018. Google Scholar
  19. H. J. Karloff, S. Suri, and S. Vassilvitskii. A model of computation for MapReduce. In Proc. ACM SPAA, pages 938-948, 2010. Google Scholar
  20. Valerie King and Jared Saia. Breaking the O(n²) bit barrier: Scalable byzantine agreement with an adaptive adversary. J. ACM, 58:18:1-18:24, July 2011. Google Scholar
  21. Valerie King, Jared Saia, Vishal Sanwalani, and Erik Vee. Scalable leader election. In SODA, pages 990-999, 2006. Google Scholar
  22. Hartmut Klauck, Danupon Nanongkai, Gopal Pandurangan, and Peter Robinson. Distributed computation of large-scale graph problems. In Piotr Indyk, editor, Proceedings of the Twenty-Sixth Annual ACM-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, SODA 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, January 4-6, 2015, pages 391-410. SIAM, 2015. Google Scholar
  23. C. Konrad, S. V. Pemmaraju, T. Riaz, and P. Robinson. The complexity of symmetry breaking in massive graphs. In Proc. DISC, volume 146, pages 26:1-26:18, 2019. Google Scholar
  24. Leslie Lamport, Robert E. Shostak, and Marshall C. Pease. The byzantine generals problem. ACM Trans. Program. Lang. Syst., 4(3):382-401, 1982. Google Scholar
  25. S. Lattanzi, B. Moseley, S. Suri, and S. Vassilvitskii. Filtering: a method for solving graph problems in MapReduce. In Proc. ACM SPAA, pages 85-94, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1989493.1989505.
  26. Reut Levi, Moti Medina, and Dana Ron. Property testing of planarity in the CONGEST model. Distributed Comput., 34(1):15-32, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00446-020-00382-3.
  27. Zvi Lotker, Elan Pavlov, Boaz Patt-Shamir, and David Peleg. MST construction in o(log log n) communication rounds. In Arnold L. Rosenberg and Friedhelm Meyer auf der Heide, editors, SPAA 2003: Proceedings of the Fifteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, June 7-9, 2003, San Diego, California, USA (part of FCRC 2003), pages 94-100. ACM, 2003. Google Scholar
  28. Gopal Pandurangan, Peter Robinson, and Michele Scquizzato. Fast distributed algorithms for connectivity and MST in large graphs. In Proceedings of the 28th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 2016, Asilomar State Beach/Pacific Grove, CA, USA, July 11-13, 2016, pages 429-438. ACM, 2016. Google Scholar
  29. Gopal Pandurangan, Peter Robinson, and Michele Scquizzato. On the distributed complexity of large-scale graph computations. In Proceedings of the 30th on Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures, SPAA 2018, Vienna, Austria, July 16-18, 2018, pages 405-414. ACM, 2018. Google Scholar
  30. Marshall C. Pease, Robert E. Shostak, and Leslie Lamport. Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. J. ACM, 27(2):228-234, 1980. Google Scholar
  31. David Peleg. Distributed Computing: A Locality-Sensitive Approach. SIAM, Philadelphia, 2000. Google Scholar
  32. Ronitt Rubinfeld and Madhu Sudan. Self-testing polynomial functions efficiently and over rational domains. In Proceedings of the Third Annual ACM/SIGACT-SIAM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms, pages 23-32. ACM/SIAM, 1992. Google Scholar
  33. Jeanette P. Schmidt, Alan Siegel, and Aravind Srinivasan. Chernoff-hoeffding bounds for applications with limited independence. SIAM J. Discret. Math., 8(2):223-250, 1995. Google Scholar
  34. Salil P. Vadhan. Pseudorandomness. Foundations and Trends in Theoretical Computer Science, 7(1-3):1-336, 2012. Google Scholar
Questions / Remarks / Feedback
X

Feedback for Dagstuhl Publishing


Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail