DOCSLIB.ORG

2.2.1 Proof of Work We Use Hashes to Verify Data (Where You Could See the Verification As the Transfer of Information)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2.2.1 Proof of Work We Use Hashes to Verify Data (Where You Could See the Verification As the Transfer of Information) 2.2.1 Proof of Work We use hashes to verify data (where you could see the verification as the transfer of information). So now, we have the availability to put huge amounts of texts into very short outputs. So a cryptographic hash algorithm does nothing more than translating all these numbers resulting from the input (for example from the word KOIOS as done in previous session). The hash function keeps altering the input in a function (formula), until it arrives at a 256 bit output in case of SHA-256. We will show you in the later how that's done. But by altering it with the function, you create the same fixed length of output. This makes it efficient to verify data. Also very important, you can't alter the information. So, it's basically a sort of a stamp, a digital fingerprint. As soon as you change this input, you change the output, as shown before. But how can we use this? We can use this for example, to communicate something as show in the introductory clip cryptography crash course. But also to calculate something. And why do you want to calculate something? Well… Here Proof of Work introduces itself: we use the hash function as a basis for the proof-of-work consensus. algorithm. A computer can calculate a hash in an instant, you could see this yourself in multiple website, but let’s use Anders his website. As you will see, by entering random data in field “data”, is that you will instantly change the hash. As you now know this is done because of the new total number that comes out of your input. By adding data in the data field you change the input and therefore also the output, compressed and represented by the SHA256 hash in this case. So this shows that to calculate one hash you only need a spit second, and this isn’t enough for 10,000 nodes spread across the globe to reach consensus. So we need to delay this hashing process to reach consensus. The goal is to (1) delay the process and (2) incentive people to put in effort to secure the network. This lead to “proof-of-work” where the miners need to score below a certain numeric outcome when they hash input. So every time you hash input (also a number), use this number as a variable in the specific hash formula, you will receive an output. Same input, will lead to the same output number which is then translated to a humanly readable hash (= digital fingerprint is therefore nothing more than a visual representation of a 256 bit number). 256 bits, either 0 or 1, will lead to 2^256 possible combinations. Approximately 10^70, which is a insanely huge number, nearly a large as the amount of atoms in the known universe (10^82). The main goal of the proof-of-work puzzle is to calculate the hash and reach an output number that lies below the difficulty target (= outcome of puzzle). Read more about it here as well. As you can imagine scoring below a certain outcome is quite hard, and keeps getting harder when you lower the target. As you can see in the example below, scoring a hash output below 10^70 is easy (every outcome is okay), scoring output below 10^35 is more difficult (only 50% is below target/difficulty = okay) and scoring < 10% is even harder (90% of hashes won’t suffice. The lower the target number, the higher the difficulty, the more difficult it is to generate an output number based on input. An easy example is a wheel of fortune of 100 numbers and you buy in first example all 100 numbers (10^70). No matter how often you spin the wheel (calculate the hash in analogy), you will win (and solve the puzzle). Want to make it harder? You buy 50 tickets, so this time you only win 50% of the times (you will need to spin statistically twice to win) and even 10 times harder when you have only bought 10 numbers. (Bitcoinwiki, 2020) (Bitcoin, 2019) With mining and hashing it is the exact same concept. Only this time the wheel of fortune is tremendously large (10^70 versus 100 in our example). Luckily you can influence the amounts of spins in the wheel you can do per seconds. By buying better mining hardware, you increase the computing power and by increasing the computing power, you increase the number of hashes you can calculate per second (= spins on the wheel of fortune). But your competition doesn’t sit idle either. So if you all buy more power, you will get more lucky and have a output number below the target (the wheel of fortune spins out your number). If you all together let the wheel pay out more than once per 10 minutes on average over the past 2016 spins, the target will adjust and become even lower, decreasing your chances of winning. pays out more than on average per 10 minute in the last. Keep in mind that “getting lucky” with a spin = solving the block difficulty = adding a new block to the blockchain and receive the block reward. (Frakenfield, Block reward, 2019) Fun fact: the difficulty target is made humanly readable and is often referred to as the “amounts of zeroes” a hash needs to start with. Currently the hash of a block needs to start with 18 zeroes, but remember: this is just a visual representation of a number. In this example you see 19 zeroes + the first transaction in the block a.k.a. the “coinbase transaction” (= not Coinbase the company named after the transaction) paying out the reward for solving the puzzle: (Wikipedia, 2020) So let’s go back to Anders example. This website works with a difficulty target represented by 4 zeroes, like Bitcoin in the Genesis block. This is an easy target, so a very high output number which is easy to score. If you change the data in the field, so for example select a different transaction as a miner, you change the outcome. This is very impractical of course and perhaps not always possible (like in the beginning of Bitcoin when there were no transactions), so we don’t change the transactions but we add a random number called “the nonce”. So try it out yourself: change the data and recalculate the nonce. Adding the tekst “hello world” will lead to a new nonce of 85,640. So by adding the bits of bytes behind number 85,640 we finally have a hash output that scores low enough that the difficulty is solved (and represented visually with four zeroes). In short: proof-of-work uses the hash algorithm, by adding a difficulty number where the output of the hash formula must be under (visually represented by 18 zeroes). This is a very small number and miners therefore need a lot of trials before they finally score below the target. This is done because otherwise it would be to easy to mine blocks and too many truths would be created + the blocks would be to easy to rewrite because it is not difficult to create a block (opening up the history of transactions for malleability). Therefore the miners succeed, on average every 10 minutes, because if they get better in calculating hashes, the difficulty rises and the target number drops (making it more difficult to score below, just like limbo dancing ). Side note: PoW is designed in such a way that there are no short- cuts other than trial and error. You can only solve this faster, by buying computational power, increasing the chances versus your competitors. A very complex game with all kinds of strategies, but more about this later. Note the following: 1. Block 613713 in the example above is 14,776,367,535,688.64 times harder to solve than Genesis block 0!! The harder the block is to solve the harder it is to rewrite history. This is also known as the hash rate. This has risen tremendously over the last few years (for Bitcoin and other PoW based blockchains), mainly caused by the introduction of ASIC mining. Some blockchains, that are ASIC-resistance see a lesser increase (ASIC resistance = hard to calculate the hash, so they use another hashing algorithm than SHA-256). (Bitcoin, 2019) (Bitinfocharts, n.d.) 2. If you want to change the past you need to solve ALL the blocks since that past. So you would also need to solve in the Anders Example the blocks 2,3,4,5. This is doable with such a low difficulty in the Anders example, but in Bitcoin’s case you would need to solve five blocks while outcompeting the rest of the world. Even if you did succeed and rewrite this history, WE ALL SEE! Because you have a different hash than us all. 3. We already all reached consensus that our truth was the SSOT so you would also need to convince us by forming the longest chain. The longest chain is only possible if you act according to protocol, so play by the rules. If you don’t, you would have waisted huge amounts of energy. So rewriting the past and do something invalid is not possible (we honest nodes would your different block, analyse the change compared with out blocks, find out that the transaction is invalid and we would ignore your block because we don’t want to risk building our block and energy power on your new false blockchain (in addition: not only is this economically not profitable, we might also have principles on building on your fraud ledger).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Bitcoin Tumbles As Miners Face Crackdown - the Buttonwood Tree Bitcoin Tumbles As Miners Face Crackdown
    6/8/2021 Bitcoin Tumbles as Miners Face Crackdown - The Buttonwood Tree Bitcoin Tumbles as Miners Face Crackdown By Haley Cafarella - June 1, 2021 Bitcoin tumbles as Crypto miners face crackdown from China. Cryptocurrency miners, including HashCow and BTC.TOP, have halted all or part of their China operations. This comes after Beijing intensified a crackdown on bitcoin mining and trading. Beijing intends to hammer digital currencies amid heightened global regulatory scrutiny. This marks the first time China’s cabinet has targeted virtual currency mining, which is a sizable business in the world’s second-biggest economy. Some estimates say China accounts for as much as 70 percent of the world’s crypto supply. Cryptocurrency exchange Huobi suspended both crypto-mining and some trading services to new clients from China. The plan is that China will instead focus on overseas businesses. BTC.TOP, a crypto mining pool, also announced the suspension of its China business citing regulatory risks. On top of that, crypto miner HashCow said it would halt buying new bitcoin mining rigs. Crypto miners use specially-designed computer equipment, or rigs, to verify virtual coin transactions. READ MORE: Sustainable Mineral Exploration Powers Electric Vehicle Revolution This process produces newly minted crypto currencies like bitcoin. “Crypto mining consumes a lot of energy, which runs counter to China’s carbon neutrality goals,” said Chen Jiahe, chief investment officer of Beijing-based family office Novem Arcae Technologies. Additionally, he said this is part of China’s goal of curbing speculative crypto trading. As result, bitcoin has taken a beating in the stock market.
    [Show full text]
  • Asymmetric Proof-Of-Work Based on the Generalized Birthday Problem
    Equihash: Asymmetric Proof-of-Work Based on the Generalized Birthday Problem Alex Biryukov Dmitry Khovratovich University of Luxembourg University of Luxembourg [email protected] [email protected] Abstract—The proof-of-work is a central concept in modern Long before the rise of Bitcoin it was realized [20] that cryptocurrencies and denial-of-service protection tools, but the the dedicated hardware can produce a proof-of-work much requirement for fast verification so far made it an easy prey for faster and cheaper than a regular desktop or laptop. Thus the GPU-, ASIC-, and botnet-equipped users. The attempts to rely on users equipped with such hardware have an advantage over memory-intensive computations in order to remedy the disparity others, which eventually led the Bitcoin mining to concentrate between architectures have resulted in slow or broken schemes. in a few hardware farms of enormous size and high electricity In this paper we solve this open problem and show how to consumption. An advantage of the same order of magnitude construct an asymmetric proof-of-work (PoW) based on a compu- is given to “owners” of large botnets, which nowadays often tationally hard problem, which requires a lot of memory to gen- accommodate hundreds of thousands of machines. For prac- erate a proof (called ”memory-hardness” feature) but is instant tical DoS protection, this means that the early TLS puzzle to verify. Our primary proposal Equihash is a PoW based on the schemes [8], [17] are no longer effective against the most generalized birthday problem and enhanced Wagner’s algorithm powerful adversaries.
    [Show full text]
  • Bitcoin Making Gold Redundant?
    March 2021 Edition BloombergMarch 2021 GalaxyEdition Crypto Index (BGCI) Bloomberg Crypto Outlook 2021 Bloomberg Crypto Outlook Bitcoin Making Gold Redundant? `There's No Alternative' Tilting Toward Bitcoin vs. Gold, Stocks Bitcoin $40,000-$60,000 Consolidation and 60/40 Mix Migration Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Discount May Signal March to $100,000 Bitcoin Replacing Gold Is Happening -- A Question of Endurance Death, Taxes and Bitcoin Volatility Dropping Toward Gold, Amazon Worried About Bitcoin Sellers? They Appear Similar to 2017 Start 1 March 2021 Edition Bloomberg Crypto Outlook 2021 CONTENTS 3 Overview 3 60/40 Mix Migration 5 Rising Bitcoin Wave and GBTC 5 Bitcoin Is Replacing Gold 6 Bitcoin Volatity In Decline 7 Diminishing Bitcon Supply, Reluctant Sellers 2 March 2021 Edition Bloomberg Crypto Outlook 2021 Learn more about Bloomberg Indices Most data and outlook as of March 2, 2021 Mike McGlone – BI Senior Commodity Strategist BI COMD (the commodity dashboard) Note ‐ Click on graphics to get to the Bloomberg terminal `There's No Alternative' Tilting Toward Bitcoin vs. Gold, Stocks $100,000 May Be Bitcoin's Next Threshold. Maturation makes sense in the Bitcoin price-discovery process, but we see the upward trajectory more likely to simply stay the Performance: Bloomberg Galaxy Cypto Index (BGCI) course on rising demand vs. declining supply and an February +24%, 2021 to March 2: +77% increasingly favorable macroeconomic environment. Having February +40%, 2021 +64% Bitcoin met the initial 2021 threshold just above $50,000 and a $1 trillion market cap, the benchmark crypto asset is ripe to (Bloomberg Intelligence) -- Bitcoin in 2021 is transitioning stabilize for awhile, with $40,000 marking initial retracement from a speculative risk asset to a global digital store-of-value, support.
    [Show full text]
  • Piecework: Generalized Outsourcing Control for Proofs of Work
    (Short Paper): PieceWork: Generalized Outsourcing Control for Proofs of Work Philip Daian1, Ittay Eyal1, Ari Juels2, and Emin G¨unSirer1 1 Department of Computer Science, Cornell University, [email protected],[email protected],[email protected] 2 Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute, Cornell Tech [email protected] Abstract. Most prominent cryptocurrencies utilize proof of work (PoW) to secure their operation, yet PoW suffers from two key undesirable prop- erties. First, the work done is generally wasted, not useful for anything but the gleaned security of the cryptocurrency. Second, PoW is natu- rally outsourceable, leading to inegalitarian concentration of power in the hands of few so-called pools that command large portions of the system's computation power. We introduce a general approach to constructing PoW called PieceWork that tackles both issues. In essence, PieceWork allows for a configurable fraction of PoW computation to be outsourced to workers. Its controlled outsourcing allows for reusing the work towards additional goals such as spam prevention and DoS mitigation, thereby reducing PoW waste. Meanwhile, PieceWork can be tuned to prevent excessive outsourcing. Doing so causes pool operation to be significantly more costly than today. This disincentivizes aggregation of work in mining pools. 1 Introduction Distributed cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin [18] rely on the equivalence \com- putation = money." To generate a batch of coins, clients in a distributed cryp- tocurrency system perform an operation called mining. Mining requires solving a computationally intensive problem involving repeated cryptographic hashing. Such problem and its solution is called a Proof of Work (PoW) [11]. As currently designed, nearly all PoWs suffer from one of two drawbacks (or both, as in Bitcoin).
    [Show full text]
  • Consent Order: HDR Global Trading Limited, Et Al
    Case 1:20-cv-08132-MKV Document 62 Filed 08/10/21 Page 1 of 22 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK USDC SDNY DOCUMENT ELECTRONICALLY FILED COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING DOC #: COMMISSION, DATE FILED: 8/10/2021 Plaintiff v. Case No. 1:20-cv-08132 HDR GLOBAL TRADING LIMITED, 100x Hon. Mary Kay Vyskocil HOLDINGS LIMITED, ABS GLOBAL TRADING LIMITED, SHINE EFFORT INC LIMITED, HDR GLOBAL SERVICES (BERMUDA) LIMITED, ARTHUR HAYES, BENJAMIN DELO, and SAMUEL REED, Defendants CONSENT ORDER FOR PERMANENT INJUNCTION, CIVIL MONETARY PENALTY, AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF AGAINST DEFENDANTS HDR GLOBAL TRADING LIMITED, 100x HOLDINGS LIMITED, SHINE EFFORT INC LIMITED, and HDR GLOBAL SERVICES (BERMUDA) LIMITED I. INTRODUCTION On October 1, 2020, Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“Commission” or “CFTC”) filed a Complaint against Defendants HDR Global Trading Limited (“HDR”), 100x Holdings Limited (100x”), ABS Global Trading Limited (“ABS”), Shine Effort Inc Limited (“Shine”), and HDR Global Services (Bermuda) Limited (“HDR Services”), all doing business as “BitMEX” (collectively “BitMEX”) as well as BitMEX’s co-founders Arthur Hayes (“Hayes”), Benjamin Delo (“Delo”), and Samuel Reed (“Reed”), (collectively “Defendants”), seeking injunctive and other equitable relief, as well as the imposition of civil penalties, for violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1–26 (2018), and the Case 1:20-cv-08132-MKV Document 62 Filed 08/10/21 Page 2 of 22 Commission’s Regulations (“Regulations”) promulgated thereunder, 17 C.F.R. pts. 1–190 (2020). (“Complaint,” ECF No. 1.)1 II. CONSENTS AND AGREEMENTS To effect settlement of all charges alleged in the Complaint against Defendants HDR, 100x, ABS, Shine, and HDR Services (“Settling Defendants”) without a trial on the merits or any further judicial proceedings, Settling Defendants: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Cryptocurrency: the Economics of Money and Selected Policy Issues
    Cryptocurrency: The Economics of Money and Selected Policy Issues Updated April 9, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45427 SUMMARY R45427 Cryptocurrency: The Economics of Money and April 9, 2020 Selected Policy Issues David W. Perkins Cryptocurrencies are digital money in electronic payment systems that generally do not require Specialist in government backing or the involvement of an intermediary, such as a bank. Instead, users of the Macroeconomic Policy system validate payments using certain protocols. Since the 2008 invention of the first cryptocurrency, Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies have proliferated. In recent years, they experienced a rapid increase and subsequent decrease in value. One estimate found that, as of March 2020, there were more than 5,100 different cryptocurrencies worth about $231 billion. Given this rapid growth and volatility, cryptocurrencies have drawn the attention of the public and policymakers. A particularly notable feature of cryptocurrencies is their potential to act as an alternative form of money. Historically, money has either had intrinsic value or derived value from government decree. Using money electronically generally has involved using the private ledgers and systems of at least one trusted intermediary. Cryptocurrencies, by contrast, generally employ user agreement, a network of users, and cryptographic protocols to achieve valid transfers of value. Cryptocurrency users typically use a pseudonymous address to identify each other and a passcode or private key to make changes to a public ledger in order to transfer value between accounts. Other computers in the network validate these transfers. Through this use of blockchain technology, cryptocurrency systems protect their public ledgers of accounts against manipulation, so that users can only send cryptocurrency to which they have access, thus allowing users to make valid transfers without a centralized, trusted intermediary.
    [Show full text]
  • Short Selling Attack: a Self-Destructive but Profitable 51% Attack on Pos Blockchains
    Short Selling Attack: A Self-Destructive But Profitable 51% Attack On PoS Blockchains Suhyeon Lee and Seungjoo Kim CIST (Center for Information Security Technologies), Korea University, Korea Abstract—There have been several 51% attacks on Proof-of- With a PoS, the attacker needs to obtain 51% of the Work (PoW) blockchains recently, including Verge and Game- cryptocurrency to carry out a 51% attack. But unlike PoW, Credits, but the most noteworthy has been the attack that saw attacker in a PoS system is highly discouraged from launching hackers make off with up to $18 million after a successful double spend was executed on the Bitcoin Gold network. For this reason, 51% attack because he would have to risk of depreciation the Proof-of-Stake (PoS) algorithm, which already has advantages of his entire stake amount to do so. In comparison, bad of energy efficiency and throughput, is attracting attention as an actor in a PoW system will not lose their expensive alternative to the PoW algorithm. With a PoS, the attacker needs mining equipment if he launch a 51% attack. Moreover, to obtain 51% of the cryptocurrency to carry out a 51% attack. even if a 51% attack succeeds, the value of PoS-based But unlike PoW, attacker in a PoS system is highly discouraged from launching 51% attack because he would have to risk losing cryptocurrency will fall, and the attacker with the most stake his entire stake amount to do so. Moreover, even if a 51% attack will eventually lose the most. For these reasons, those who succeeds, the value of PoS-based cryptocurrency will fall, and attempt to attack 51% of the PoS blockchain will not be the attacker with the most stake will eventually lose the most.
    [Show full text]
  • The Bitcoin Trading Ecosystem
    ArcaneReport(PrintReady).qxp 21/07/2021 14:43 Page 1 THE INSTITUTIONAL CRYPTO CURRENCY EXCHANGE INSIDE FRONT COVER: BLANK ArcaneReport(PrintReady).qxp 21/07/2021 14:43 Page 3 The Bitcoin Trading Ecosystem Arcane Research LMAX Digital Arcane Research is a part of Arcane Crypto, bringing LMAX Digital is the leading institutional spot data-driven analysis and research to the cryptocurrency exchange, run by the LMAX Group, cryptocurrency space. After launch in August 2019, which also operates several leading FCA regulated Arcane Research has become a trusted brand, trading venues for FX, metals and indices. Based on helping clients strengthen their credibility and proven, proprietary technology from LMAX Group, visibility through research reports and analysis. In LMAX Digital allows global institutions to acquire, addition, we regularly publish reports, weekly market trade and hold the most liquid digital assets, Bitcoin, updates and articles to educate and share insights. Ethereum, Litecoin, Bitcoin Cash and XRP, safely and securely. Arcane Crypto develops and invests in projects, focusing on bitcoin and digital assets. Arcane Trading with all the largest institutions globally, operates a portfolio of businesses, spanning the LMAX Digital is a primary price discovery venue, value chain for digital nance. As a group, Arcane streaming real-time market data to the industry’s deliver services targeting payments, investment, and leading indices and analytics platforms, enhancing trading, in addition to a media and research leg. the quality of market information available to investors and enabling a credible overview of the Arcane has the ambition to become a leading player spot crypto currency market. in the digital assets space by growing the existing businesses, invest in cutting edge projects, and LMAX Digital is regulated by the Gibraltar Financial through acquisitions and consolidation.
    [Show full text]
  • Coinbase Explores Crypto ETF (9/6) Coinbase Spoke to Asset Manager Blackrock About Creating a Crypto ETF, Business Insider Reports
    Crypto Week in Review (9/1-9/7) Goldman Sachs CFO Denies Crypto Strategy Shift (9/6) GS CFO Marty Chavez addressed claims from an unsubstantiated report earlier this week that the firm may be delaying previous plans to open a crypto trading desk, calling the report “fake news”. Coinbase Explores Crypto ETF (9/6) Coinbase spoke to asset manager BlackRock about creating a crypto ETF, Business Insider reports. While the current status of the discussions is unclear, BlackRock is said to have “no interest in being a crypto fund issuer,” and SEC approval in the near term remains uncertain. Looking ahead, the Wednesday confirmation of Trump nominee Elad Roisman has the potential to tip the scales towards a more favorable cryptoasset approach. Twitter CEO Comments on Blockchain (9/5) Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey, speaking in a congressional hearing, indicated that blockchain technology could prove useful for “distributed trust and distributed enforcement.” The platform, given its struggles with how best to address fraud, harassment, and other misuse, could be a prime testing ground for decentralized identity solutions. Ripio Facilitates Peer-to-Peer Loans (9/5) Ripio began to facilitate blockchain powered peer-to-peer loans, available to wallet users in Argentina, Mexico, and Brazil. The loans, which utilize the Ripple Credit Network (RCN) token, are funded in RCN and dispensed to users in fiat through a network of local partners. Since all details of the loan and payments are recorded on the Ethereum blockchain, the solution could contribute to wider access to credit for the unbanked. IBM’s Payment Protocol Out of Beta (9/4) Blockchain World Wire, a global blockchain based payments network by IBM, is out of beta, CoinDesk reports.
    [Show full text]
  • Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies Law Enforcement Investigative Guide
    2018-46528652 Regional Organized Crime Information Center Special Research Report Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies Law Enforcement Investigative Guide Ref # 8091-4ee9-ae43-3d3759fc46fb 2018-46528652 Regional Organized Crime Information Center Special Research Report Bitcoin and Cryptocurrencies Law Enforcement Investigative Guide verybody’s heard about Bitcoin by now. How the value of this new virtual currency wildly swings with the latest industry news or even rumors. Criminals use Bitcoin for money laundering and other Enefarious activities because they think it can’t be traced and can be used with anonymity. How speculators are making millions dealing in this trend or fad that seems more like fanciful digital technology than real paper money or currency. Some critics call Bitcoin a scam in and of itself, a new high-tech vehicle for bilking the masses. But what are the facts? What exactly is Bitcoin and how is it regulated? How can criminal investigators track its usage and use transactions as evidence of money laundering or other financial crimes? Is Bitcoin itself fraudulent? Ref # 8091-4ee9-ae43-3d3759fc46fb 2018-46528652 Bitcoin Basics Law Enforcement Needs to Know About Cryptocurrencies aw enforcement will need to gain at least a basic Bitcoins was determined by its creator (a person Lunderstanding of cyptocurrencies because or entity known only as Satoshi Nakamoto) and criminals are using cryptocurrencies to launder money is controlled by its inherent formula or algorithm. and make transactions contrary to law, many of them The total possible number of Bitcoins is 21 million, believing that cryptocurrencies cannot be tracked or estimated to be reached in the year 2140.
    [Show full text]
  • Transparent and Collaborative Proof-Of-Work Consensus
    StrongChain: Transparent and Collaborative Proof-of-Work Consensus Pawel Szalachowski, Daniël Reijsbergen, and Ivan Homoliak, Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD); Siwei Sun, Institute of Information Engineering and DCS Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity19/presentation/szalachowski This paper is included in the Proceedings of the 28th USENIX Security Symposium. August 14–16, 2019 • Santa Clara, CA, USA 978-1-939133-06-9 Open access to the Proceedings of the 28th USENIX Security Symposium is sponsored by USENIX. StrongChain: Transparent and Collaborative Proof-of-Work Consensus Pawel Szalachowski1 Daniel¨ Reijsbergen1 Ivan Homoliak1 Siwei Sun2;∗ 1Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) 2Institute of Information Engineering and DCS Center, Chinese Academy of Sciences Abstract a cryptographically-protected append-only list [2] is intro- duced. This list consists of transactions grouped into blocks Bitcoin is the most successful cryptocurrency so far. This and is usually referred to as a blockchain. Every active pro- is mainly due to its novel consensus algorithm, which is tocol participant (called a miner) collects transactions sent based on proof-of-work combined with a cryptographically- by users and tries to solve a computationally-hard puzzle in protected data structure and a rewarding scheme that incen- order to be able to write to the blockchain (the process of tivizes nodes to participate. However, despite its unprece- solving the puzzle is called mining). When a valid solution dented success Bitcoin suffers from many inefficiencies. For is found, it is disseminated along with the transactions that instance, Bitcoin’s consensus mechanism has been proved to the miner wishes to append.
    [Show full text]
  • Regulating Storage Overhead in Existing Pow-Based Blockchains
    Regulating Storage Overhead in Existing PoW-based Blockchains Frederik Armknecht Jens-Matthias Bohli* University of Mannheim Mannheim University of Applied Sciences Germany Germany [email protected] [email protected] Ghassan O. Karame Wenting Li NEC Laboratories Europe NEC Laboratories Europe Germany Germany [email protected] [email protected] ABSTRACT so far. This resulted in a sharp variance in the number of Proof of Work (PoW) blockchains regulate the frequency and blockchain replicas over time. Namely, during the early years security of extensions to the blockchain in a decentralized of PoW blockchains, every miner was also a \full-node" and manner by adjusting the difficulty in the network. However, stored a full copy of the blockchain. As a result, the blockchain analogous decentralized measures to regulate the replica- witnessed an unprecedented level of replication (>200,000 tion level of the associated transactions and blocks data are replica) until early 2014 [14, 15]. Nowadays, the current completely missing so far. We argue that such measures are difficulty level of PoW mining is prohibitively high enough required as well. On the one hand, the smaller the number that miners do not have incentives to operate solo. Instead, of replicas, the higher the vulnerability of the system against joining a mining pool emerges as an attractive option for compromises and DoS-attacks. On the other hand, the larger miners to receive a portion of the block reward on a consistent the number of replicas, the higher the storage overhead, and basis. Here, workers do not connect directly to the blockchain; the higher the operational blockchain cost are.
    [Show full text]