DOCSLIB.ORG

Deconstructing Blockchains: a Comprehensive Survey On

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Deconstructing Blockchains: a Comprehensive Survey On 1 Deconstructing Blockchains: A Comprehensive Survey on Consensus, Membership and Structure Christopher Natoli, Jiangshan Yu∗ , Vincent Gramoli , and Paulo Esteves-Verissimo Abstract—It is no exaggeration to say that since the introduc- papers [53, 123, 124, 150, 155, 168, 193, 196, 204], wiki tion of Bitcoin, blockchains have become a disruptive technology documentations [116, 156, 180, 183] and websites [5, 11, that has shaken the world. However, the rising popularity of the 130, 133]. This is in contrast with the traditional academic paradigm has led to a flurry of proposals addressing variations and/or trying to solve problems stemming from the initial research that conveys results through scientific publications specification. This added considerable complexity to the current typically peer-reviewed by specialists of particular domains, blockchain ecosystems, amplified by the absence of detail in many like distributed systems, cryptography, networking or game accompanying blockchain whitepapers. theory [63, 84, 94, 120]. The lack of detail has left room for Through this paper, we set out to explain blockchains in a interpretation that has sometimes led researchers to different simple way, taming that complexity through the deconstruction of the blockchain into three simple, critical components common conclusions [22, 75, 102]. to all known systems: membership selection, consensus mechanism Through this paper, we set out to explain blockchains in a and structure. We propose an evaluation framework with insight simple way, taming that complexity through the deconstruc- into system models, desired properties and analysis criteria, using tion of the blockchain into three simple, critical components the decoupled components as criteria. We use this framework to common to most known systems: membership selection, con- provide clear and intuitive overviews of the design principles behind the analyzed systems and the properties achieved. We sensus mechanism, and structure. The membership selection hope our effort will help clarifying the current state of blockchain component determines a committee of nodes that participate proposals and provide directions to the analysis of future pro- in the consensus; the consensus mechanism component is posals. responsible for deciding on the next block, run by the selected committee of nodes; and the structure component represents how the data is organized in the blockchain. Thanks to our I.I NTRODUCTION deconstruction, we are able to provide a clear and unique N 2008 Satoshi Nakamoto released Bitcoin [150], high- landscape of blockchains, as depicted in Figure 1. We then I lighting the power and importance of distributed systems. propose an evaluation framework with insights into different The use of distributed systems in our lives has been trans- key system models, desired properties, and analysis criteria, parently controlled by significant actors. The introduction using the decoupled components as parameters. We use this of Bitcoin provided the public with insight into ungoverned framework to provide overviews of the design principles distributed systems and sparked a movement towards decen- behind the analyzed systems and the achieved properties. tralization. Initially, the blockchain technology went vastly There are notable works aggregating and analyzing unnoticed and was heavily integrated with the deep web due to blockchains, each providing unique evaluation but primarily its pseudonymity properties [55, 217]. However, the concept focusing on one aspect and constructing specific frameworks to of the blockchain quickly gained interest and grew to what comparatively analyze. Cachin and Vukolic´ present a compar- arXiv:1908.08316v1 [cs.DC] 22 Aug 2019 it is today. The growing interest promoted the introduction ison of consensus protocols in permissioned blockchains [49]. of new chains and the growth of distributed ledger tech- Abraham and Malkhi also present the idea of deconstructing nologies [4, 10, 14, 78, 137, 141, 170]. However, the rising the blockchain into layers [18] but with a focus on relating popularity of the paradigm has led to a flurry of proposals Nakamoto’s consensus versus Byzantine fault tolerant (BFT) addressing variations and/or trying to solve problems arising protocols. Similarly, Vukolic´ [212] explores the contrast be- from the initial specification. tween blockchains and BFT replicated state machines, pointing The complexity introduced through popularity was am- to scalability problems faced by both and provide insight into plified by the absence of detail in the proposals. As an upcoming proposals. Gramoli [97] investigates mainstream example, the vast majority were presented through white blockchains and discusses classical Byzantine consensus in the context of the blockchain and discusses some of the dangers ∗ Corresponding author. of misunderstanding guarantees, problems that we address and Christopher Natoli is with University of Sydney, Australia. Vincent Gramoli is with University of Sydney and CSIRO Data61, systematize in our paper. Wang et al. [213] approach the Australia. blockchain consensus mechanisms in the perspective of game Jiangshan Yu is with Monash University, Australia. E-mail: theory and the strategies of adoption of nodes. Bano et al. [26] [email protected] Paulo Esteves-Verissimo is with the Interdisciplinary Centre for Security, provide an overview on how different blockchain consensus Reliability and Trust, University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg. work, and compare existing Proof-of-* against other proposed 2 Figure 1. The blockchain landscape. consensus mechanisms based on their properties. However, no vides background information about blockchains and the core other work has deconstructed the blockchain into these unique properties relating to our decomposition. Section III outlines components and analysed all three. the criteria used for comparison and analysis. Section IV dis- While existing work provides good analysis of specific sets cusses and analyzes the membership selection and proposals. of the properties of blockchains, it remained challenging, even Section V provides an analysis of consensus mechanisms. for the educated but non-expert readers to get a thorough Section VI overviews structure proposals for the blockchain. and comparative picture of the design principles of different Section VII highlights proposed attacks relating to the mem- complicated systems. To our knowledge, we are the first to bership selection and consensus. Section VIII discusses other classify blockchain based on a decomposition into membership insights and aspects. We conclude with a summary of our selection, consensus mechanism and structure, categorizing analysis and discuss future directions. and providing an analysis of leading proposals. As an addition to our analysis, we provide an overview of the attacks and II.B ACKGROUND threats related to membership selection, consensus goals, and In this section, we explore the foundational concepts of the structural assumptions. We hope that our analysis will clarify blockchain and discuss the initial specification of Bitcoin. We future design directions and inspire new designs based on in- then discuss the applicability of blockchains and conclude by novative coherent combinations revealed by our decomposition highlighting the known impediments. and categorization. Thus, this paper presents the following contributions: A. Blockchain • It innovatively deconstructs the blockchain into three Blockchain is an append-only distributed ledger of trans- simple, critical components: membership selection, con- actions. First introduced with Bitcoin [150], the blockchain sensus mechanism and structure. originated as a decentralized electronic payment system, which • It provides an evaluation framework with insight into removed the need for any third-party involvement for payment system models, desired properties and analysis criteria, transfers. The original Bitcoin blockchain organized data as using the decoupled components as parameters. a chain of blocks directed by utilizing the block hash val- • It provides a clear and intuitive overview of the design ues, hence the name “blockchain”. Later proposals expanded principles behind analyzed systems and their properties, from a single chain to parallel chains [120, 209, 221] and in terms of the parameters above. graphs [25, 128, 168]. This has led to the term “blockchain” • It proposes, based on the analyzed state of the art, becoming a misnamed concept for distributed ledgers. a categorization of membership selection and consen- The decentralized nature of blockchains means that all sus approaches. In addition, it provides generic charts nodes verify and store the transactions that have taken place representing the design principles for each category of in the system, and propose new blocks to append to the membership selection, to simplify future designs. chain. The blockchain structure can be seen as a linearly The remainder of the paper is as follows. Section II pro- increasing linked list of transactions batched into blocks. 3 The chain begins with a genesis block at index 0 and each of the claimed output. An output has two fields, namely block appended links to its direct predecessor forming the value and address. They define the value to be transferred chain. This, however, is the combination of pre-existing ideas to the address. Bitcoins are just transaction outputs with an constructed together to form what the blockchain is today. arbitrary value with 8 decimal
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chia Proof of Space Construction
    Chia Proof of Space Construction Introduction In order to create a secure blockchain consensus algorithm using disk space, a Proof of Space is scheme is necessary. This document describes a practical contruction of Proofs of Space, based on Beyond Hellman’s Time- Memory Trade-Offs with Applications to Proofs of Space [1]. We use the techniques laid out in that paper, extend it from 2 to 7 tables, and tweak it to make it efficient and secure, for use in the Chia Blockchain. The document is divided into three main sections: What (mathematical definition of a proof of space), How (how to implement proof of space), and Why (motivation and explanation of the construction) sections. The Beyond Hellman paper can be read first for more mathematical background. Chia Proof of Space Construction Introduction What is Proof of Space? Definitions Proof format Proof Quality String Definition of parameters, and M, f, A, C functions: Parameters: f functions: Matching function M: A′ function: At function: Collation function C: How do we implement Proof of Space? Plotting Plotting Tables (Concepts) Tables Table Positions Compressing Entry Data Delta Format ANS Encoding of Delta Formatted Points Stub and Small Deltas Parks Checkpoint Tables Plotting Algorithm Final Disk Format Full algorithm Phase 1: Forward Propagation Phase 2: Backpropagation Phase 3: Compression Phase 4: Checkpoints Sort on Disk Plotting Performance Space Required Proving Proof ordering vs Plot ordering Proof Retrieval Quality String Retrieval Proving Performance Verification Construction
    [Show full text]
  • Blockchain Healthcare & Policy Synopsis
    Blockchain Healthcare & Policy Synopsis AN EXECUTIVE REPORT OF THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES & NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY’S BLOCKCHAIN CHALLENGE October 2016 digitalchamber.org Table of Contents PART I: Blockchain in Healthcare and Research Workshop | 3 | I. Overview & Key Takeaways | 3 | II. Introduction: The White House II.I. Tim Polk, The White House, Office of Science and Technology Policy | 4 | III. Blockchain Level Setting III.I. John Kelsey, National Institute of Standards and Technology | 4 | III.II. Lily Chen, National Institute of Standards and Technology | 5 | IV. Blockchain Reality Check - Alternative IV.I. Evaluating Blockchain and Alternatives: Mance Harmon, Ping Identity | 5 | IV.II. Blockchain Challenges in Real Life: Stephen Wilson, Constellation Research | 6 | IV.III. “Fit for Purpose” Distributed Ledger Technology: Drummond Reed, Respect Network | 6 | V. Blockchain Reality Check - Challenges V.I. DHS Identity Innovations Grants: Many Sporny, Digital Bazaar | 7 | V.II. IoT Device Identity: Tiana Laurence and Andrew Yashchuk, Factom IRIS | 7 | V.III. Decentralized Identifiers (DIDs): Solving the Root Identity Problem, Drummond Reed, Respect Network | 7 | V.IV. Decentralized Certification Service, Adam Migus, XCELERATE Solutions | 8 | VI. Blockchain Challenge Presentations VI.I. Blockchain: The Chain of Trust and its Potential to Transform Healthcare – IBM’s Point of View Srini Attili and Shahram Ebdollahi, IBM Global Business Service Public Sector | 8 | VI.II. Blockchain: Securing
    [Show full text]
  • Blockchain in an Internet-Of-Things Network Based on User Participation
    Blockchain in an Internet-of-Things Network Based on User Participation Robert Ljungblad Computer Science and Engineering, bachelor's level 2019 Luleå University of Technology Department of Computer Science, Electrical and Space Engineering ABSTRACT The internet-of-things is the relatively new and rapidly growing concept of connecting everyday devices to the internet. Every day more and more devices are added to the internet-of-things and it is not showing any signs of slowing down. In addition, advancements in new technologies such as blockchains, artificial intelligence, virtual reality and machine learning are made practically every day. However, there are still much to learn about these technologies. This thesis explores the possibilities of blockchain technology by applying it to an internet-of-things network based on user participation. More specifically, it is applied to a use case derived from Luleå Kommun’s wishes to easier keep track of how full the city’s trash cans are. The goal of the thesis is to learn more about how blockchains can help an internet-of-things network as well as what issues can arise. The method takes an exploratory approach to the problem by partaking in a workshop with Luleå Kommun and by performing a literature study. It also takes a qualitative approach by creating a proof-of-concept solution to experience the technology firsthand. The final proof-of-concept as well as issues that arose during the project are analysed with the help of information gathered and experience gained throughout the project. It is concluded that blockchain technology can help communication in an internet-of-things network based on user participation.
    [Show full text]
  • Chancen Und Herausforderungen Von DLT (Blockchain) in Mobilität Und Logistik
    Chancen und Herausforderungen von DLT (Blockchain) in Mobilität und Logistik FRAUNHOFER-INSTITUT FÜR ANGEWANDTE INFORMATIONSTECHNIK FIT CHANCEN UND HERAUSFORDERUNGEN VON DLT (BLOCKCHAIN) IN MOBILITÄT UND LOGISTIK Prof. Dr. Gilbert Fridgen Prof. Dr. Nikolas Guggenberger Prof. Dr. Thomas Hoeren Prof. Wolfgang Prinz (PhD) Prof. Dr. Nils Urbach Johannes Baur, Henning Brockmeyer, Wolfgang Gräther, Elisaweta Rabovskaja, Vincent Schlatt, André Schweizer, Johannes Sedlmeir, Lars Wederhake Vielen Dank den weiteren Mitwirkenden: Matthias Babel, Martin Brennecke, Patrick Camus, Benedict Drasch, Tobias Guggenberger, Luis Lämmermann, Jannik Lockl, Sven Radszuwill, Alexander Rieger, Marco Schmidt, Nico Thanner, Patrick Troglauer, Florian Vogt, Malte Weißert, Felix Würmseher Inhalt 1 Management Summary .......................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Zielsetzung des Gutachtens ..............................................................................................................1 1.2 Allgemeine Analyse..........................................................................................................................2 1.2.1 Technische Betrachtung ...................................................................................................................................... 2 1.2.2 Gesellschaftlich-ökonomische Perspektive ......................................................................................................... 3 1.2.2.1 Status quo ......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2016-05-31 Overview of Swirlds Hashgraph
    Overview of Swirlds Hashgraph Leemon Baird [email protected] May 31, 2016 The hashgraph data structure and Swirlds consensus algorithm provide a new platform for distributed consensus. This paper gives an overview of some of its properties, and comparisons with the Bitcoin blockchain. In this paper, the term “blockchain” will generally refer to the system used in Bitcoin, rather than the large number of variants that have been proposed. The goal of a distributed consensus algorithm is to allow a community of users to come to an agreement on the order in which some of them generated transactions, when no single member is trusted by everyone. In this way, it is a system for generating trust, when individuals do not already trust each other. The Swirlds hashgraph system achieves this along with being fair, fast, provable, Byzantine, ACID compliant, efficient, inexpensive, timestamped, DoS resistant, and optionally non-permissioned. This is what those terms mean: The hashgraph is fair, because no individual can manipulate the order of the transactions. For example, imagine a stock market, where Alice and Bob both try to buy the last available share of a stock at the same moment for the same price. In blockchain, a miner might put both those transactions in a single block, and have complete freedom to choose what order they occur. Or the miner might choose to only include Alice’s transaction, and delay Bob’s to some future block. In the hashgraph, there is no way for an individual to affect the consensus order of those transactions. The best Alice can do is to invest in a better internet connection so that her transaction reaches everyone before Bob’s.
    [Show full text]
  • IPFS and Friends: a Qualitative Comparison of Next Generation Peer-To-Peer Data Networks Erik Daniel and Florian Tschorsch
    1 IPFS and Friends: A Qualitative Comparison of Next Generation Peer-to-Peer Data Networks Erik Daniel and Florian Tschorsch Abstract—Decentralized, distributed storage offers a way to types of files [1]. Napster and Gnutella marked the beginning reduce the impact of data silos as often fostered by centralized and were followed by many other P2P networks focusing on cloud storage. While the intentions of this trend are not new, the specialized application areas or novel network structures. For topic gained traction due to technological advancements, most notably blockchain networks. As a consequence, we observe that example, Freenet [2] realizes anonymous storage and retrieval. a new generation of peer-to-peer data networks emerges. In this Chord [3], CAN [4], and Pastry [5] provide protocols to survey paper, we therefore provide a technical overview of the maintain a structured overlay network topology. In particular, next generation data networks. We use select data networks to BitTorrent [6] received a lot of attention from both users and introduce general concepts and to emphasize new developments. the research community. BitTorrent introduced an incentive Specifically, we provide a deeper outline of the Interplanetary File System and a general overview of Swarm, the Hypercore Pro- mechanism to achieve Pareto efficiency, trying to improve tocol, SAFE, Storj, and Arweave. We identify common building network utilization achieving a higher level of robustness. We blocks and provide a qualitative comparison. From the overview, consider networks such as Napster, Gnutella, Freenet, BitTor- we derive future challenges and research goals concerning data rent, and many more as first generation P2P data networks, networks.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluating Inclusion, Equality, Security, and Privacy in Pseudonym Parties and Other Proofs of Personhood
    Identity and Personhood in Digital Democracy: Evaluating Inclusion, Equality, Security, and Privacy in Pseudonym Parties and Other Proofs of Personhood Bryan Ford Swiss Federal Institute of Technology in Lausanne (EPFL) November 5, 2020 Abstract of enforced physical security and privacy can address the coercion and vote-buying risks that plague today’s E- Digital identity seems at first like a prerequisite for digi- voting and postal voting systems alike. We also examine tal democracy: how can we ensure “one person, one vote” other recently-proposed approaches to proof of person- online without identifying voters? But the full gamut of hood, some of which offer conveniencessuch as all-online digital identity solutions – e.g., online ID checking, bio- participation. These alternatives currently fall short of sat- metrics, self-sovereign identity, and social/trust networks isfying all the key digital personhood goals, unfortunately, – all present severe flaws in security, privacy, and trans- but offer valuable insights into the challenges we face. parency, leaving users vulnerable to exclusion, identity loss or theft, and coercion. These flaws may be insur- mountable because digital identity is a cart pulling the Contents horse. We cannot achieve digital identity secure enough to support the weight of digital democracy, until we can 1 Introduction 2 build it on a solid foundation of digital personhood meet- ing key requirements. While identity is about distinguish- 2 Goals for Digital Personhood 4 ing one person from another through attributes or affilia- tions, personhood is about giving all real people inalien- 3 Pseudonym Parties 5 able digital participation rights independent of identity, 3.1 Thebasicidea.
    [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]
  • The Performance, Interoperability and Integration of Distributed Ledger Technologies
    LICENTIATE T H E SIS Emanuel Palm Palm Emanuel Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Division of EISLAB The Performance, Interoperability ISSN 1402-1757 The Performance, Interoperability and Integration of Distributed Ledger Technologies and Integration Interoperability of Distributed Ledger The Performance, and Integration of ISBN 978-91-7790-402-1 (print) ISBN 978-91-7790-403-8 (pdf) Luleå University of Technology 2019 Distributed Ledger Technologies Emanuel Palm Industrial Electronics The Performance, Interoperability and Integration of Distributed Ledger Technologies EmanuelK.Palm Dept. of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering Lule˚a University of Technology Lule˚a, Sweden Supervisors: Ulf Bodin, Olov Schel´en and Jerker Delsing Printed by Luleå University of Technology, Graphic Production 2019 ISSN 1402-1757 ISBN 978-91-7790-402-1 (print) ISBN 978-91-7790-403-8 (pdf) Luleå 2019 www.ltu.se To my beloved wife, Sofia. iii iv Abstract In the wake of the financial crisis of 2008, Bitcoin emerged as a radical new alternative to the fiat currencies of the traditional banking sector. Through the use of a novel kind of probabilistic consensus algorithm, Bitcoin proved it possible to guarantee the integrity of a digital currency by relying on network majority votes instead of trusted institutions. By showing that it was technically feasible to, at least to some extent, replace the entire banking sector with computers, many significant actors started asking what else this new technology could help automate. A subsequent, seemingly inevitable, wave of efforts produced a multitude of new distributed ledger systems, architectures and applications, all somehow attempting to leverage distributed consensus algorithms to replace trusted intermediaries, facilitating value ownership, transfer and regulation.
    [Show full text]
  • Liquidity Or Leakage Plumbing Problems with Cryptocurrencies
    Liquidity Or Leakage Plumbing Problems With Cryptocurrencies March 2018 Liquidity Or Leakage - Plumbing Problems With Cryptocurrencies Liquidity Or Leakage Plumbing Problems With Cryptocurrencies Rodney Greene Quantitative Risk Professional Advisor to Z/Yen Group Bob McDowall Advisor to Cardano Foundation Distributed Futures 1/60 © Z/Yen Group, 2018 Liquidity Or Leakage - Plumbing Problems With Cryptocurrencies Foreword Liquidity is the probability that an asset can be converted into an expected amount of value within an expected amount of time. Any token claiming to be ‘money’ should be very liquid. Cryptocurrencies often exhibit high price volatility and wide spreads between their buy and sell prices into fiat currencies. In other markets, such high volatility and wide spreads might indicate low liquidity, i.e. it is difficult to turn an asset into cash. Normal price falls do not increase the number of sellers but should increase the number of buyers. A liquidity hole is where price falls do not bring out buyers, but rather generate even more sellers. If cryptocurrencies fail to provide easy liquidity, then they fail as mediums of exchange, one of the principal roles of money. However, there are a number of ways of assembling a cryptocurrency and a number of parameters, such as the timing of trades, the money supply algorithm, and the assembling of blocks, that might be done in better ways to improve liquidity. This research should help policy makers look critically at what’s needed to provide good liquidity with these exciting systems. Michael Parsons FCA Chairman, Cardano Foundation, Distributed Futures 2/60 © Z/Yen Group, 2018 Liquidity Or Leakage - Plumbing Problems With Cryptocurrencies Contents Foreword ..............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Reputation Driven Dynamic Access Control Framework for Iot Atop Poa Ethereum Blockchain
    Reputation Driven Dynamic Access Control Framework for IoT atop PoA Ethereum Blockchain Auqib Hamid Lonea,∗, Roohie Naaza aDepartment of Computer Science and Engineering., NIT Srinagar, Jammu and Kashmir,India,190006 Abstract Security and Scalability are two major challenges that IoT is currently fac- ing. Access control to critical IoT infrastructure is considered as top security challenge that IoT faces. Data generated by IoT devices may be driving many hard real time systems, thus it is of utmost importance to guarantee integrity and authenticity of the data and resources at the first place itself. Due to heterogeneous and constrained nature of IoT devices, traditional IoT security frameworks are not able to deliver scalable, efficient and manage- able mechanisms to meet the requirements of IoT devices. On the other hand Blockchain technology has shown great potential to bridge the missing gap towards building a truly decentralized, trustworthy, secure and scalable environment for IoT. Allowing access to IoT resources and data managed through Blockchain will provide an additional security layer backed by the strongest cryptographic algorithms available. In this work we present a rep- utation driven dynamic access control framework for IoT applications based on Proof of Authority Blockchain, we name it as Rep-ACM. In Rep-ACM framework we build two major services, one for Reputation building (for bet- ter IoT device behaviour regulations) and other for Misbehaviour detection (for detecting any Misbehaviour on object resource usage). Both of these services work in coordination with other services of proposed framework to determine who can access what and under what conditions access should be granted.
    [Show full text]
  • What's Next in Blockchain Research?
    What’s Next in Blockchain Research? – An Identification of Key Topics Using a Multidisciplinary Perspective Horst Treiblmaier, Melanie Swan, Primavera de Filippi, Mary Lacity, Thomas Hardjono, Henry Kim To cite this version: Horst Treiblmaier, Melanie Swan, Primavera de Filippi, Mary Lacity, Thomas Hardjono, et al.. What’s Next in Blockchain Research? – An Identification of Key Topics Using a Multidisciplinary Perspective. Database for Advances in Information Systems, In press. hal-03098483 HAL Id: hal-03098483 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03098483 Submitted on 5 Jan 2021 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems What’s Next in Blockchain Research? – An Identification of Key Topics Using a Multidisciplinary Perspective Horst Treiblmaier [email protected] Melanie Swan [email protected] Primavera de Filippi [email protected] Mary Lacity [email protected] Thomas Hardjono [email protected] Henry Kim [email protected] Date of Acceptance: 6/23/2020 This file is the unedited version of a manuscript that has been accepted for publication in The Data Base for Advances in Information Systems. Feel free to distribute this file to those interested in reading about this forthcoming research.
    [Show full text]