Document Open Access Logo

Optimal Multilevel Slashing for Blockchains

Authors Kenan Wood , Hammurabi Mendes , Jonad Pulaj

PDF
Thumbnail PDF

File

LIPIcs.OPODIS.2024.8.pdf
  • Filesize: 0.83 MB
  • 18 pages

Document Identifiers

Author Details

Kenan Wood
  • Davidson College, NC, USA
Hammurabi Mendes
  • Davidson College, NC, USA
Jonad Pulaj
  • Davidson College, NC, USA

Cite As Get BibTex

Kenan Wood, Hammurabi Mendes, and Jonad Pulaj. Optimal Multilevel Slashing for Blockchains. In 28th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2024). Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), Volume 324, pp. 8:1-8:18, Schloss Dagstuhl – Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik (2024) https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2024.8

Abstract

We present the notion of multilevel slashing, where proof-of-stake blockchain validators can obtain gradual levels of assurance that a certain block is bound to be finalized in a global consensus procedure, unless an increasing and optimally large number of Byzantine processes have their staked assets slashed - that is, deducted - due to provably incorrect behavior. Our construction is a highly parameterized generalization of combinatorial intersection systems based on finite projective spaces, with asymptotic high availability and optimal slashing properties. Even under weak conditions, we show that our construction has asymptotically optimal slashing properties with respect to message complexity and validator load; this result also illustrates a fundamental trade off between message complexity, load, and slashing. In addition, we show that any intersection system whose ground elements are disjoint subsets of nodes (e.g. "committees" in committee-based consensus protocols) has asymptotic high availability under similarly weak conditions. Finally, our multilevel construction gives the flexibility to blockchain validators to decide how many "levels" of finalization assurance they wish to obtain. This functionality can be seen either as (i) a form of an early, slashing-based block finalization; or (ii) a service to support reorg tolerance.

Subject Classification

ACM Subject Classification
  • Theory of computation → Distributed algorithms
  • Mathematics of computing → Discrete mathematics
Keywords
  • Blockchains
  • Finality
  • Slashablility
  • Committees
  • Availability

Metrics

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

References

  1. A. El Abbadi and S. Toueg. Maintaining availability in partitioned replicated databases. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 14(2):264-290, June 1989. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/63500.63501.
  2. Lacramioara Astefanoaei, Pierre Chambart, Antonella Del Pozzo, Edward Tate, Sara Tucci Piergiovanni, and Eugen Zalinescu. Tenderbake - classical BFT style consensus for public blockchains. CoRR, abs/2001.11965, 2020. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2001.11965.
  3. Alexandra Boldyreva. Threshold signatures, multisignatures and blind signatures based on the gap-diffie-hellman-group signature scheme. In Yvo G. Desmedt, editor, Public Key Cryptography - PKC 2003, pages 31-46, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2002. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. Google Scholar
  4. G. Bracha. Asynchronous Byzantine agreement protocols. Information and Computation, 75(2):130-143, November 1987. URL: https://doi.org/10.1016/0890-5401(87)90054-X.
  5. Vitalik Buterin and Virgil Griffith. Casper the friendly finality gadget. CoRR, abs/1710.09437, 2017. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/1710.09437.
  6. Vitalik Buterin, Diego Hernandez, Thor Kamphefner, Khiem Pham, Zhi Qiao, Danny Ryan, Juhyeok Sin, Ying Wang, and Yan X. Zhang. Combining GHOST and casper. CoRR, abs/2003.03052, 2020. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2003.03052.
  7. Christian Cachin, Rachid Guerraoui, and Luís Rodrigues. Introduction to Reliable and Secure Distributed Programming. Springer, 2 edition, February 2011. Google Scholar
  8. Christian Cachin, Giuliano Losa, and Luca Zanolini. Quorum Systems in Permissionless Networks. In Eshcar Hillel, Roberto Palmieri, and Etienne Rivière, editors, 26th International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2022), volume 253 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 17:1-17:22, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2023. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2022.17.
  9. Miguel Castro and Barbara Liskov. Practical byzantine fault tolerance. In Proceedings of the Third Symposium on Operating Systems Design and Implementation, OSDI '99, pages 173-186, USA, 1999. USENIX Association. URL: https://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=296824.
  10. Benjamin Y. Chan and Elaine Shi. Streamlet: Textbook streamlined blockchains. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, AFT '20, pages 1-11, New York, NY, USA, 2020. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3419614.3423256.
  11. David C Clark. Applications of finite geometries to designs and codes. Michigan Technological University, 2012. Google Scholar
  12. Charles J Colbourn. CRC handbook of combinatorial designs. CRC press, 2010. Google Scholar
  13. Charles J Colbourn, Jeffrey H Dinitz, and Douglas R Stinson. Quorum systems constructed from combinatorial designs. Information and Computation, 169(2):160-173, 2001. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/INCO.2001.3044.
  14. Hector Garcia-Molina and Daniel Barbara. How to assign votes in a distributed system. J. ACM, 32(4):841-860, October 1985. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/4221.4223.
  15. Álvaro García-Pérez and Alexey Gotsman. Federated Byzantine Quorum Systems. In Jiannong Cao, Faith Ellen, Luis Rodrigues, and Bernardo Ferreira, editors, 22nd International Conference on Principles of Distributed Systems (OPODIS 2018), volume 125 of Leibniz International Proceedings in Informatics (LIPIcs), pages 17:1-17:16, Dagstuhl, Germany, 2019. Schloss Dagstuhl - Leibniz-Zentrum für Informatik. URL: https://doi.org/10.4230/LIPIcs.OPODIS.2018.17.
  16. 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, SOSP '17, pages 51-68, New York, NY, USA, 2017. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3132747.3132757.
  17. Maurice Herlihy. A quorum-consensus replication method for abstract data types. ACM Trans. Comput. Syst., 4(1):32-53, February 1986. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/6306.6308.
  18. Maurice Herlihy. Dynamic quorum adjustment for partitioned data. ACM Trans. Database Syst., 12(2):170-194, June 1987. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/22952.22953.
  19. Aggelos Kiayias, Alexander Russell, Bernardo David, and Roman Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In Jonathan Katz and Hovav Shacham, editors, Advances in Cryptology - CRYPTO 2017, pages 357-388, Cham, 2017. Springer International Publishing. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-63688-7_12.
  20. Akhil Kumar and Shun Yan Cheung. A high availability √N hierarchical grid algorithm for replicated data. Information Processing Letters, 40(6):311-316, 1991. Google Scholar
  21. Jun Luo and Ying He. Geoquorum: Load balancing and energy efficient data access in wireless sensor networks. In 2011 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM, pages 616-620. IEEE, 2011. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/INFCOM.2011.5935238.
  22. Mamoru Maekawa. A √N algorithm for mutual exclusion in decentralized systems. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems (TOCS), 3(2):145-159, 1985. Google Scholar
  23. Dahlia Malkhi and Michael Reiter. Byzantine quorum systems. Distributed computing, 11(4):203-213, 1998. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/S004460050050.
  24. Dahlia Malkhi, Michael Reiter, and Rebecca Wright. Probabilistic quorum systems. In Proceedings of the Sixteenth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC '97, pages 267-273, New York, NY, USA, 1997. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/259380.259458.
  25. David Mazières. The stellar consensus protocol: A federated model for internet-level consensus. Technical report, StellarDevelopmentFoundation, 2016. Google Scholar
  26. Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf, 2008. Accessed: 2024-09-05.
  27. M. Naor and A. Wool. The load, capacity and availability of quorum systems. In Proceedings 35th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, pages 214-225, 1994. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SFCS.1994.365692.
  28. Moni Naor and Udi Wieder. Scalable and dynamic quorum systems. Distributed Computing, 17(4):311-322, 2005. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00446-004-0114-3.
  29. 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, 2021. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/SP40001.2021.00045.
  30. Joachim Neu, Ertem Nusret Tas, and David Tse. Two more attacks on proof-of-stake ghost/ethereum. In Proceedings of the 2022 ACM Workshop on Developments in Consensus, pages 43-52, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3560829.3563560.
  31. David Peleg and Avishai Wool. The availability of quorum systems. Information and Computation, 123(2):210-223, 1995. URL: https://doi.org/10.1006/INCO.1995.1169.
  32. Sampath Rangarajan, Sanjeev Setia, and Satish K Tripathi. A fault-tolerant algorithm for replicated data management. IEEE Transactions on parallel and distributed systems, 6(12):1271-1282, 1995. URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/71.476168.
  33. 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.
  34. Rik Sarkar, Xianjin Zhu, and Jie Gao. Double rulings for information brokerage in sensor networks. In Proceedings of the 12th annual international conference on mobile computing and networking, pages 286-297, 2006. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/1161089.1161122.
  35. Caspar Schwarz-Schilling, Joachim Neu, Barnabé Monnot, Aditya Asgaonkar, Ertem Nusret Tas, and David Tse. Three attacks on proof-of-stake ethereum. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 560-576. Springer, 2022. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-18283-9_28.
  36. Victor Shoup. Practical threshold signatures. In Bart Preneel, editor, Advances in Cryptology - EUROCRYPT 2000, pages 207-220, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2000. Springer Berlin Heidelberg. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45539-6_15.
  37. T. Srikanth and S. Toueg. Simulating authenticated broadcasts to derive simple fault-tolerant algorithms. Distributed Computing, 2(2):80-94, June 1987. URL: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01667080.
  38. Alistair Stewart and Eleftherios Kokoris-Kogia. GRANDPA: a byzantine finality gadget. CoRR, abs/2007.01560, 2020. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.01560.
  39. Dimitris Vyzovitis, Yusef Napora, Dirk McCormick, David Dias, and Yiannis Psaras. Gossipsub: Attack-resilient message propagation in the filecoin and eth2.0 networks, 2020. URL: https://arxiv.org/abs/2007.02754.
  40. Maofan Yin, Dahlia Malkhi, Michael K. Reiter, Guy Golan Gueta, and Ittai Abraham. Hotstuff: Bft consensus with linearity and responsiveness. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, PODC '19, pages 347-356, New York, NY, USA, 2019. Association for Computing Machinery. URL: https://doi.org/10.1145/3293611.3331591.
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 About DROPS Imprint Privacy Contact