Document Open Access Logo

Gorilla: Safe Permissionless Byzantine Consensus

Authors Youer Pu, Ali Farahbakhsh, Lorenzo Alvisi, Ittay Eyal

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.DISC.2023.31.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.75 MB
  • 16 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Youer Pu
  • Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ali Farahbakhsh
  • Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Lorenzo Alvisi
  • Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Ittay Eyal
  • Technion, Haifa, Israel

Funding

  • Pu, Youer: Supported in part by an IC3 grant.
  • Alvisi, Lorenzo: Supported in part by NSF Award 2106954.
  • Eyal, Ittay: Supported in part by the Israel Science Foundation (grant No. 1641/18), an Avalanche Foundation grant, and an IC3 grant.

Acknowledgements

We thank Alexandra Silva and Dexter Kozen for useful discussions about proving probabilistic termination.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Youer Pu, Ali Farahbakhsh, Lorenzo Alvisi, and Ittay Eyal. Gorilla: Safe Permissionless Byzantine Consensus. In 37th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC 2023). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 281, pp. 31:1-31:16, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2023)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2023.31

Abstract

Nakamoto’s consensus protocol works in a permissionless model and tolerates Byzantine failures, but only offers probabilistic agreement. Recently, the Sandglass protocol has shown such weaker guarantees are not a necessary consequence of a permissionless model; yet, Sandglass only tolerates benign failures, and operates in an unconventional partially synchronous model. We present Gorilla Sandglass, the first Byzantine tolerant consensus protocol to guarantee, in the same synchronous model adopted by Nakamoto, deterministic agreement and termination with probability 1 in a permissionless setting. We prove the correctness of Gorilla by mapping executions that would violate agreement or termination in Gorilla to executions in Sandglass, where we know such violations are impossible. Establishing termination proves particularly interesting, as the mapping requires reasoning about infinite executions and their probabilities.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Computer systems organization → Dependable and fault-tolerant systems and networks
Keywords
  • Consensus
  • Permissionless
  • Blockchains
  • Byzantine fault tolerance
  • Deterministic Safety

Metrics

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

Related Versions

References

  1. James Aspnes. Randomized protocols for asynchronous consensus. Distributed Computing, 16(2-3):165-175, 2003. Google Scholar
  2. James Aspnes, Gauri Shah, and Jatin Shah. Wait-free consensus with infinite arrivals. In Proceedings of the thiry-fourth annual ACM symposium on Theory of computing, pages 524-533, 2002. Google Scholar
  3. Christian Badertscher, Peter Gaži, Aggelos Kiayias, Alexander Russell, and Vassilis Zikas. Ouroboros genesis: Composable proof-of-stake blockchains with dynamic availability. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 913-930, 2018. Google Scholar
  4. Vivek Bagaria, Sreeram Kannan, David Tse, Giulia Fanti, and Pramod Viswanath. Prism: Deconstructing the blockchain to approach physical limits. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 585-602, 2019. Google Scholar
  5. Gilles Barthe, Joost-Pieter Katoen, and Alexandra Silva. Foundations of Probabilistic Programming. Cambridge University Press, 2020. Google Scholar
  6. Dan Boneh, Joseph Bonneau, Benedikt Bünz, and Ben Fisch. Verifiable delay functions. In Annual international cryptology conference, pages 757-788. Springer, 2018. Google Scholar
  7. Phil Daian, Rafael Pass, and Elaine Shi. Snow white: Robustly reconfigurable consensus and applications to provably secure proof of stake. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security: 23rd International Conference, FC 2019, Frigate Bay, St. Kitts and Nevis, February 18-22, 2019, Revised Selected Papers 23, pages 23-41. Springer, 2019. Google Scholar
  8. Soubhik Deb, Sreeram Kannan, and David Tse. Posat: proof-of-work availability and unpredictability, without the work. In Financial Cryptography and Data Security: 25th International Conference, FC 2021, Virtual Event, March 1-5, 2021, Revised Selected Papers, Part II 25, pages 104-128. Springer, 2021. Google Scholar
  9. Cynthia Dwork, Nancy Lynch, and Larry Stockmeyer. Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. Journal of the ACM (JACM), 35(2):288-323, 1988. Google Scholar
  10. Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor. Pricing via processing or combatting junk mail. In Proceedings CRYPTO '92: 12th International Cryptology Conference, pages 139-147. Springer, 1992. Google Scholar
  11. Matthias Fitzi, Peter Ga, Aggelos Kiayias, and Alexander Russell. Parallel chains: Improving throughput and latency of blockchain protocols via parallel composition. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2018. Google Scholar
  12. Yossi Gilad, Rotem Hemo, Silvio Micali, Georgios Vlachos, and Nickolai Zeldovich. Algorand: Scaling byzantine agreements for cryptocurrencies. In Proceedings of the 26th symposium on operating systems principles, pages 51-68, 2017. Google Scholar
  13. Markus Jakobsson and Ari Juels. Proofs of work and bread pudding protocols. In Secure Information Networks, pages 258-272. Springer, 1999. Google Scholar
  14. Benjamin Lucien Kaminski. Advanced weakest precondition calculi for probabilistic programs. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen University, 2019. Google Scholar
  15. Rami Khalil and Naranker Dulay. Short paper: Posh proof of staked hardware consensus. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2020. Google Scholar
  16. Aggelos Kiayias, Alexander Russell, Bernardo David, and Roman Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In Advances in Cryptology-CRYPTO 2017: 37th Annual International Cryptology Conference, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, August 20-24, 2017, Proceedings, Part I, pages 357-388. Springer, 2017. Google Scholar
  17. Andrew Lewis-Pye and Tim Roughgarden. Resource pools and the cap theorem. arXiv preprint arXiv:2006.10698, 2020. Google Scholar
  18. Andrew Lewis-Pye and Tim Roughgarden. Byzantine generals in the permissionless setting, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.48550/ARXIV.2101.07095.
  19. Jieyi Long. Nakamoto consensus with verifiable delay puzzle. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.06394, 2019. Google Scholar
  20. Dahlia Malkhi, Atsuki Momose, and Ling Ren. Byzantine consensus under fully fluctuating participation. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2022. Google Scholar
  21. Michael Mirkin, Lulu Zhou, Ittay Eyal, and Fan Zhang. Sprints: Intermittent blockchain pow mining. Cryptology ePrint Archive, 2023. Google Scholar
  22. Atsuki Momose and Ling Ren. Constant latency in sleepy consensus. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 2295-2308, 2022. Google Scholar
  23. Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Decentralized Business Review, page 21260, 2008. Google Scholar
  24. Joachim Neu, Ertem Nusret Tas, and David Tse. Ebb-and-flow protocols: A resolution of the availability-finality dilemma. In 2021 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), pages 446-465. IEEE, 2021. Google Scholar
  25. Rafael Pass, Lior Seeman, and Abhi Shelat. Analysis of the blockchain protocol in asynchronous networks. In Advances in Cryptology – EUROCRYPT 2017 - 36th Annual International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, Proceedings, Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics), pages 643-673. Springer Verlag, 2017. Google Scholar
  26. Rafael Pass and Elaine Shi. The sleepy model of consensus. In Advances in Cryptology-ASIACRYPT 2017: 23rd International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptology and Information Security, Hong Kong, China, December 3-7, 2017, Proceedings, Part II 23, pages 380-409. Springer, 2017. Google Scholar
  27. Youer Pu, Lorenzo Alvisi, and Ittay Eyal. Safe Permissionless Consensus. In Christian Scheideler, editor, 36th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC 2022), volume 246 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 33:1-33:15, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2022. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2022.33.
  28. Youer Pu, Lorenzo Alvisi, and Ittay Eyal. Safe permissionless consensus. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Paper 2022/796, 2022. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2022/796.
  29. Youer Pu, Ali Farahbakhsh, Lorenzo Alvisi, and Ittay Eyal. Gorilla: Safe permissionless byzantine consensus, 2023. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2308.04080.
  30. Ronghua Xu and Yu Chen. Fairledger: a fair proof-of-sequential-work based lightweight distributed ledger for iot networks. In 2022 IEEE International Conference on Blockchain (Blockchain), pages 348-355. IEEE, 2022. 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
© 2023-2024 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH Imprint Privacy Contact