Document Open Access Logo

DAG It Off: Latency Prefers No Common Coins

Authors Ignacio Amores-Sesar , Viktor Grøndal , Adam Holmgård , Mads Ottendal

PDF

File

Thumbnail PDF
PDF
LIPIcs.DISC.2025.5.pdf
  • Filesize: 1.29 MB
  • 17 pages

Document Identifiers

Related Versions

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Security and privacy → Distributed systems security
Keywords
  • Atomic broadcast
  • DAG-based
  • Partial synchrony

Metrics

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

Abstract

We introduce Black Marlin, the first Directed Acyclic Graph (DAG)-based Byzantine atomic broadcast protocol in a partially synchronous setting that successfully forgoes the reliable broadcast and common coin primitives. Black Marlin achieves the optimal latency of 3 rounds of communication (4.25 with Byzantine faults) while maintaining optimal communication and amortized communication complexities. We present a formal security analysis of the protocol, accompanied by empirical evidence that Black Marlin outperforms state-of-the-art DAG-based protocols in both throughput and latency.

Cite As Get BibTex

Ignacio Amores-Sesar, Viktor Grøndal, Adam Holmgård, and Mads Ottendal. DAG It Off: Latency Prefers No Common Coins. In 39th International Symposium on Distributed Computing (DISC 2025). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 356, pp. 5:1-5:17, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2025) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.DISC.2025.5

Author Details

Ignacio Amores-Sesar
  • Aarhus University, Denmark
Viktor Grøndal
  • Aarhus University, Denmark
Adam Holmgård
  • Aarhus University, Denmark
Mads Ottendal
  • Aarhus University, Denmark

Funding

This work has been mostly funded by the Cryptographic Foundations for Digital Society, CryptoDigi, DFF Research Project 2, Grant ID 10.46540/3103-00077B, and partially funded by the Swiss National Science Foundation(SNSF) under grant agreement Nr. 188443 (Advanced Consensus Protocols) and by a grant from Avalanche, Inc. to the University of Bern.

References

  1. Ittai Abraham, Kartik Nayak, Ling Ren, and Zhuolun Xiang. Good-case latency of byzantine broadcast: a complete categorization. In PODC, pages 331-341. ACM, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3465084.3467899.
  2. Ignacio Amores-Sesar and Christian Cachin. We will DAG you. In ESORICS Workshops (1), volume 15263 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 276-291. Springer, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-82349-7_19.
  3. Ignacio Amores-Sesar, Christian Cachin, and Philipp Schneider. An analysis of avalanche consensus. In SIROCCO, volume 14662 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 27-44. Springer, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-60603-8_2.
  4. Ignacio Amores-Sesar, Christian Cachin, and Enrico Tedeschi. When is spring coming? A security analysis of avalanche consensus. In OPODIS, volume 253 of LIPIcs, pages 10:1-10:22. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.OPODIS.2022.10.
  5. Balaji Arun, Zekun Li, Florian Suri-Payer, Sourav Das, and Alexander Spiegelman. Shoal++: High throughput DAG BFT can be fast and robust! In NSDI, pages 813-826. USENIX Association, 2025. URL: https://www.usenix.org/conference/nsdi25/presentation/arun.
  6. Kushal Babel, Andrey Chursin, George Danezis, Anastasios Kichidis, Lefteris Kokoris-Kogias, Arun Koshy, Alberto Sonnino, and Mingwei Tian. Mysticeti: Reaching the latency limits with uncertified dags. In NDSS. The Internet Society, 2025. URL: https://www.ndss-symposium.org/ndss-paper/mysticeti-reaching-the-latency-limits-with-uncertified-dags/.
  7. Gabriel Bracha and Sam Toueg. Asynchronous consensus and broadcast protocols. J. ACM, 32(4):824-840, 1985. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/4221.214134.
  8. Christian Cachin, Rachid Guerraoui, and Luís E. T. Rodrigues. Introduction to Reliable and Secure Distributed Programming (2. ed.). Springer, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-15260-3.
  9. Ran Canetti and Tal Rabin. Fast asynchronous byzantine agreement with optimal resilience. In STOC, pages 42-51. ACM, 1993. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/167088.167105.
  10. Miguel Castro and Barbara Liskov. Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In OSDI, pages 173-186. USENIX Association, 1999. URL: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=296824.
  11. Andrew Cullen, Pietro Ferraro, Christopher K. King, and Robert Shorten. On the resilience of dag-based distributed ledgers in iot applications. IEEE Internet Things J., 7(8):7112-7122, 2020. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/JIOT.2020.2983401.
  12. George Danezis, Lefteris Kokoris-Kogias, Alberto Sonnino, and Alexander Spiegelman. Narwhal and tusk: a dag-based mempool and efficient BFT consensus. In EuroSys, pages 34-50. ACM, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3492321.3519594.
  13. Cynthia Dwork, Nancy A. Lynch, and Larry J. Stockmeyer. Consensus in the presence of partial synchrony. J. ACM, 35(2):288-323, 1988. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/42282.42283.
  14. Michael J. Fischer, Nancy A. Lynch, and Mike Paterson. Impossibility of distributed consensus with one faulty process. J. ACM, 32(2):374-382, 1985. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3149.214121.
  15. Neil Giridharan, Florian Suri-Payer, Ittai Abraham, Lorenzo Alvisi, and Natacha Crooks. Autobahn: Seamless high speed BFT. In SOSP, pages 1-23. ACM, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3694715.3695942.
  16. Idit Keidar, Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogias, Oded Naor, and Alexander Spiegelman. All you need is DAG. In PODC, pages 165-175. ACM, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3465084.3467905.
  17. Idit Keidar, Oded Naor, Ouri Poupko, and Ehud Shapiro. Cordial miners: Fast and efficient consensus for every eventuality. In DISC, volume 281 of LIPIcs, pages 26:1-26:22. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2023. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPICS.DISC.2023.26.
  18. Mysten Labs. Github, accessed on April 2025. URL: https://github.com/asonnino/mysticeti/tree/paper.
  19. Leslie Lamport. The part-time parliament. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 16(2):133-169, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/279227.279229.
  20. Serguei Popov, Olivia Saa, and Paulo Finardi. Equilibria in the tangle. Comput. Ind. Eng., 136:160-172, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CIE.2019.07.025.
  21. Facebook Research. Bullshark implementation. Github, accessed on April 2025. https://github.com/facebookresearch/narwhal/tree/bullshark. Google Scholar
  22. Team Rocket, Maofan Yin, Kevin Sekniqi, Robbert van Renesse, and Emin Gün Sirer. Scalable and probabilistic leaderless BFT consensus through metastability. CoRR, abs/1906.08936, 2019. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.08936.
  23. Victor Shoup. Blue fish, red fish, live fish, dead fish. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 1235, 2024. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/1235.
  24. Nibesh Shrestha, Aniket Kate, and Kartik Nayak. Sailfish: Towards improving latency of dag-based BFT. IACR Cryptol. ePrint Arch., page 472, 2024. URL: https://eprint.iacr.org/2024/472.
  25. Alexander Spiegelman, Balaji Arun, Rati Gelashvili, and Zekun Li. Shoal: Improving DAG-BFT latency and robustness. In FC (1), volume 14744 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 92-109. Springer, 2024. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-78676-1_6.
  26. Alexander Spiegelman, Neil Giridharan, Alberto Sonnino, and Lefteris Kokoris-Kogias. Bullshark: DAG BFT protocols made practical. In CCS, pages 2705-2718. ACM, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3548606.3559361.
  27. Maofan Yin, Dahlia Malkhi, Michael K. Reiter, Guy Golan-Gueta, and Ittai Abraham. Hotstuff: BFT consensus with linearity and responsiveness. In PODC, pages 347-356. ACM, 2019. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3293611.3331591.
Any Issues?
X

Feedback on the Current Page

CAPTCHA

Thanks for your feedback!

Feedback submitted to Dagstuhl Publishing

Could not send message

Please try again later or send an E-mail
© 2023-2025 Schloss Dagstuhl – LZI GmbH About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact