Document Open Access Logo

Accountability and Reconfiguration: Self-Healing Lattice Agreement

Authors Luciano Freitas de Souza, Petr Kuznetsov, Thibault Rieutord, Sara Tucci-Piergiovanni

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.OPODIS.2021.25.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.81 MB
  • 23 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Luciano Freitas de Souza
  • LTCI, Télécom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, France
Petr Kuznetsov
  • LTCI, Télécom Paris, Institut Polytechnique de Paris, France
Thibault Rieutord
  • CEA-List, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France
Sara Tucci-Piergiovanni
  • CEA-List, Université Paris-Saclay, Palaiseau, France

Funding

Luciano Freitas de Souza was supported by Nomadic Labs, and Petr Kuznetsov by TrustShare Innovation Chair.

Cite AsGet BibTex

Luciano Freitas de Souza, Petr Kuznetsov, Thibault Rieutord, and Sara Tucci-Piergiovanni. Accountability and Reconfiguration: Self-Healing Lattice Agreement. In 25th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2021). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 217, pp. 25:1-25:23, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2022)
https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2021.25

Abstract

An accountable distributed system provides means to detect deviations of system components from their expected behavior. It is natural to complement fault detection with a reconfiguration mechanism, so that the system could heal itself, by replacing malfunctioning parts with new ones. In this paper, we describe a framework that can be used to implement a large class of accountable and reconfigurable replicated services. We build atop the fundamental lattice agreement abstraction lying at the core of storage systems and cryptocurrencies. Our asynchronous implementation of accountable lattice agreement ensures that every violation of consistency is followed by an undeniable evidence of misbehavior of a faulty replica. The system can then be seamlessly reconfigured by evicting faulty replicas, adding new ones and merging inconsistent states. We believe that this paper opens a direction towards asynchronous "self-healing" systems that combine accountability and reconfiguration.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Distributed algorithms
Keywords
  • Reconfiguration
  • accountability
  • asynchronous
  • lattice agreement

Metrics

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

References

  1. M. K. Aguilera, I. Keidar, D. Malkhi, and A. Shraer. Dynamic atomic storage without consensus. J. ACM, 58(2):7:1-7:32, 2011. Google Scholar
  2. E. Alchieri, A. Bessani, F. Greve, and J. da Silva Fraga. Efficient and modular consensus-free reconfiguration for fault-tolerant storage. In OPODIS, pages 26:1-26:17, 2017. Google Scholar
  3. L. Alvisi, D. Malkhi, E. Pierce, M. K. Reiter, and R. N. Wright. Dynamic byzantine quorum systems. In Proceeding International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks. DSN 2000, pages 283-292. IEEE, 2000. Google Scholar
  4. H. Attiya, M. Herlihy, and O. Rachman. Atomic snapshots using lattice agreement. Distributed Comput., 8(3):121-132, 1995. Google Scholar
  5. M. Bellare and S. K. Miner. A forward-secure digital signature scheme. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 431-448. Springer, 1999. Google Scholar
  6. X. Boyen, H. Shacham, E. Shen, and B. Waters. Forward-secure signatures with untrusted update. In Proceedings of the 13th ACM conference on Computer and communications security, pages 191-200, 2006. Google Scholar
  7. G. Bracha. Asynchronous Byzantine agreement protocols. Information and Computation, 75(2):130-143, Nov. 1987. Google Scholar
  8. C. Cachin, R. Guerraoui, and L. Rodrigues. Introduction to reliable and secure distributed programming. Springer Science & Business Media, 2011. Google Scholar
  9. M. Castro and B. Liskov. Practical Byzantine fault tolerance and proactive recovery. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 20(4):398-461, 2002. Google Scholar
  10. T. D. Chandra, V. Hadzilacos, and S. Toueg. The weakest failure detector for solving consensus. Journal of the ACM, 43(4):685-722, July 1996. Google Scholar
  11. P. Civit, S. Gilbert, and V. Gramoli. Polygraph: Accountable byzantine agreement. In 2021 IEEE 41st International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pages 403-413. IEEE, 2021. Google Scholar
  12. C. Delporte-Gallet, H. Fauconnier, R. Guerraoui, V. Hadzilacos, P. Koutnetzov, and S. Toueg. The weakest failure detectors to solve certain fundamental problems in distributed computing. In Proceedings of the 23th ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, 2004. Google Scholar
  13. M. Drijvers, S. Gorbunov, G. Neven, and H. Wee. Pixel: Multi-signatures for consensus. In 29th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 20), Boston, MA, Aug. 2020. USENIX Association. Google Scholar
  14. J. Faleiro, S. Rajamani, K. Rajan, G. Ramalingam, and K. Vaswani. Generalized lattice agreement. In PODC, pages 125-134, 2012. Google Scholar
  15. E. Gafni and D. Malkhi. Elastic configuration maintenance via a parsimonious speculating snapshot solution. In DISC, pages 140-153, 2015. Google Scholar
  16. S. Gilbert, N. A. Lynch, and A. A. Shvartsman. Rambo: a robust, reconfigurable atomic memory service for dynamic networks. Distributed Comput., 23(4):225-272, 2010. Google Scholar
  17. G. R. Goodson, J. J. Wylie, G. R. Ganger, and M. K. Reiter. Efficient byzantine-tolerant erasure-coded storage. In (DSN, pages 135-144. IEEE Computer Society, 2004. Google Scholar
  18. A. Haeberlen and P. Kuznetsov. The Fault Detection Problem. In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS'09), Dec. 2009. Google Scholar
  19. A. Haeberlen, P. Kuznetsov, and P. Druschel. The case for byzantine fault detection. In Proceedings of the Second Workshop on Hot Topics in System Dependability (HotDep'06), Nov. 2006. Google Scholar
  20. A. Haeberlen, P. Kuznetsov, and P. Druschel. PeerReview: Practical accountability for distributed systems. In Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles (SOSP'07), Oct. 2007. Google Scholar
  21. L. Jehl, R. Vitenberg, and H. Meling. Smartmerge: A new approach to reconfiguration for atomic storage. In DISC, pages 154-169, 2015. Google Scholar
  22. K. P. Kihlstrom, L. E. Moser, and P. M. Melliar-Smith. Byzantine fault detectors for solving consensus. Comput. J., 46(1):16-35, 2003. Google Scholar
  23. P. Kuznetsov, T. Rieutord, and S. Tucci-Piergiovanni. Reconfigurable lattice agreement and applications. In OPODIS, 2019. Google Scholar
  24. P. Kuznetsov and A. Tonkikh. Asynchronous reconfiguration with byzantine failures. In H. Attiya, editor, DISC, volume 179 of LIPIcs, pages 27:1-27:17. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2020. Google Scholar
  25. K. Lev-Ari, A. Spiegelman, I. Keidar, and D. Malkhi. Fairledger: A fair blockchain protocol for financial institutions. In OPODIS, volume 153 of LIPIcs, pages 4:1-4:17. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2019. Google Scholar
  26. B. Liskov and R. Rodrigues. Tolerating byzantine faulty clients in a quorum system. In ICDCS, page 34. IEEE Computer Society, 2006. Google Scholar
  27. G. A. D. Luna, E. Anceaume, and L. Querzoni. Byzantine generalized lattice agreement. In IPDPS, pages 674-683. IEEE, 2020. Google Scholar
  28. T. Malkin, D. Micciancio, and S. Miner. Efficient generic forward-secure signatures with an unbounded number of time periods. In International Conference on the Theory and Applications of Cryptographic Techniques, pages 400-417. Springer, 2002. Google Scholar
  29. J. Martin, L. Alvisi, and M. Dahlin. Minimal byzantine storage. In D. Malkhi, editor, DISC, volume 2508 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 311-325. Springer, 2002. Google Scholar
  30. J.-P. Martin and L. Alvisi. A framework for dynamic byzantine storage. In International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks, 2004, pages 325-334. IEEE, 2004. Google Scholar
  31. M. Pease, R. Shostak, and L. Lamport. Reaching agreement in the presence of faults. Journal of the ACM, 27(2):228-234, Apr. 1980. Google Scholar
  32. A. Ranchal-Pedrosa and V. Gramoli. Blockchain is dead, long live blockchain! accountable state machine replication for longlasting blockchain. CoRR, abs/2007.10541, 2020. Google Scholar
  33. M. Shapiro, N. M. Preguiça, C. Baquero, and M. Zawirski. Conflict-free replicated data types. In SSS, pages 386-400, 2011. Google Scholar
  34. A. Spiegelman and I. Keidar. On liveness of dynamic storage. In Structural Information and Communication Complexity - 24th International Colloquium, SIROCCO 2017, Porquerolles, France, June 19-22, 2017, Revised Selected Papers, pages 356-376, 2017. Google Scholar
  35. A. Spiegelman, I. Keidar, and D. Malkhi. Dynamic reconfiguration: Abstraction and optimal asynchronous solution. In DISC, pages 40:1-40:15, 2017. Google Scholar
  36. X. Zheng and V. K. Garg. Byzantine lattice agreement in asynchronous systems. In 24th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems, OPODIS 2020, December 14-16, 2020, Strasbourg, France (Virtual Conference), pages 4:1-4:16. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik, 2020. Google Scholar
  37. X. Zheng and V. K. Garg. Byzantine lattice agreement in asynchronous systems. In Q. Bramas, R. Oshman, and P. Romano, editors, OPODIS, volume 184 of LIPIcs, pages 4:1-4:16, 2020. 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