Permacoin repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation ...

Bobtail: A Proof-of-Work Target that Minimizes Blockchain Mining Variance

arXiv:1709.08750
Date: 2017-10-19
Author(s): George Bissias, Brian Neil Levine

Link to Paper


Abstract
Blockchain systems are designed to produce blocks at a constant average rate. The most popular systems currently employ a Proof of Work (PoW) algorithm as a means of creating these blocks. Bitcoin produces, on average, one block every 10 minutes. An unfortunate limitation of all deployed PoW blockchain systems is that the time between blocks has high variance. For example, 5% of the time, Bitcoin's inter-block time is at least 40 minutes. This variance impedes the consistent flow of validated transactions through the system. We propose an alternative process for PoW-based block discovery that results in an inter-block time with significantly lower variance. Our algorithm, called Bobtail, generalizes the current algorithm by comparing the mean of the k lowest order statistics to a target. We show that the variance of inter-block times decreases as k increases. If our approach were applied to Bitcoin, about 80% of blocks would be found within 7 to 12 minutes, and nearly every block would be found within 5 to 18 minutes; the average inter-block time would remain at 10 minutes. Further, we show that low-variance mining significantly thwarts doublespend and selfish mining attacks. For Bitcoin and Ethereum currently (k=1), an attacker with 40% of the mining power will succeed with 30% probability when the merchant sets up an embargo of 8 blocks; however, when k>=20, the probability of success falls to less than 1%. Similarly, for Bitcoin and Ethereum currently, a selfish miner with 40% of the mining power will claim about 66% of blocks; however, when k>=5, the same miner will find that selfish mining is less successful than honest mining. The cost of our approach is a larger block header.

References
[1] Bitcoin cash. https://www.bitcoincash.org/.
[2] Litecoin. https://litecoin.org/.
[3] Ethash. https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Ethash, Aug 3 2017.
[4] Martin Abadi, Mike Burrows, Mark Manasse, and Ted Wobber. Moderately hard, memory-bound functions. ACM Trans. Internet Technol., 5(2):299–327, May 2005.
[5] Tuomas Aura, Pekka Nikander, and Jussipekka Leiwo. Dos-resistant authentication with client puzzles. In Revised Papers from the 8th International Workshop on Security Protocols, pages 170–177, 2001.
[6] Adam Back. Hashcash - Amortizable Publicly Auditable CostFunctions, 2002.
[7] Iddo Bentov, Ariel Gabizon, and Alex Mizrahi. Cryptocurrencies without proof of work. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 142–157. Springer, 2016.
[8] Iddo Bentov, Charles Lee, Alex Mizrahi, and Meni Rosenfeld. Proof of Activity: Extending Bitcoin’s Proof of Work via Proof of Stake [Extended Abstract] y. ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review, 42(3):34–37, 2014.
[9] Bobtails. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_bobtail.
[10] Xavier Boyen, Christopher Carr, and Thomas Haines. BlockchainFree Cryptocurrencies: A Framework for Truly Decentralised Fast Transactions. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2016/871, Sept 2016. http://eprint.iacr.org/2016/871.
[11] George Casella and Roger L. Berger. Statistical inference. Brooks Cole, Pacific Grove, CA, 2002.
[12] Liqun Chen and Wenbo Mao. An auditable metering scheme for web advertisement applications. Information Security, pages 475–485, 2001.
[13] F. Coelho. An (Almost) Constant-Effort Solution- Verification Proofof-Work Protocol Based on Merkle Trees. In Progress in Cryptology – AFRICACRYPT, pages 80–93, June 2008.
[14] Drew Dean and Adam Stubblefield. Using client puzzles to protect tls. In Proceedings of the 10th Conference on USENIX Security Symposium - Volume 10, SSYM’01, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2001. USENIX Association.
[15] J. Douceur. The Sybil Attack. In Proc. Intl Wkshp on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS), March 2002.
[16] Cynthia Dwork and Moni Naor. Pricing via processing or combatting junk mail. In In 12th Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 139–147, 1992.
[17] Ethereum Homestead Documentation. http://ethdocs.org/en/latest/.
[18] Ittay Eyal, Adem Efe Gencer, Emin Gun Sirer, and Robbert Van Renesse. Bitcoin-ng: A scalable blockchain protocol. In 13th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 16), pages 45–59, Santa Clara, CA, 2016. USENIX Association.
[19] Ittay Eyal and Emin Gün Sirer. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. In International conference on financial cryptography and data security, pages 436–454. Springer, 2014.
[20] M. Franklin and D. Malkhi. Auditable metering with ligthweigth security. In Proc. Financial Cryptography, pages 151–160, 1997.
[21] Arthur Gervais, Ghassan O. Karame, Karl Wust, Vasileios Glykantzis, Hubert Ritzdorf, and Srdjan Capkun. On the Security and Performance of Proof of Work Blockchains. https://eprint.iacr.org/2016/555, 2016.
[22] Bogdan Groza and Bogdan Warinschi. Cryptographic puzzles and dos resilience, revisited. Des. Codes Cryptography, 73(1):177–207, October 2014.
[23] Markus Jakobsson and Ari Juels. Proofs of Work and Bread Pudding Protocols. In Proc. Conference on Secure Information Networks: Communications and Multimedia Security, pages 258–272, 1999.
[24] A. Juels and J. Brainard. Client puzzles: A cryptographic countermeasure against connection depletion attacks. In Proc. Networks and Distributed Security Systems, pages 151–165, 1999.
[25] Ben Laurie and Richard Clayton. “Proof-of-work" proves not to work; version 0.2. In Proc. Workshop on Economics and Information Security, 2004.
[26] Andrew Miller, Ari Juels, Elaine Shi, Bryan Parno, and Jonathan Katz. Permacoin: Repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation. In Proc. IEEE Security and Privacy, pages 475–490, 2014.
[27] Satoshi Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System, May 2009.
[28] A. Pinar Ozisik and Brian Neil Levine. An Explanation of Nakamoto’s Analysis of Double-spend Attacks. Technical Report arXiv:1701.03977, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA, January 2017.
[29] Ayelet Sapirshtein, Yonatan Sompolinsky, and Aviv Zohar. Optimal Selfish Mining Strategies in Bitcoin. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1507.06183.pdf, July 2015.
[30] XiaoFeng Wang and Michael K. Reiter. Defending against denial-ofservice attacks with puzzle auctions. In Proceedings of the 2003 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, SP ’03, pages 78–, Washington, DC, USA, 2003. IEEE Computer Society
submitted by dj-gutz to myrXiv [link] [comments]

The Proof is in the Pudding: Proofs of Work for Solving Discrete Logarithms

Cryptology ePrint Archive: Report 2018/939
Date: 2018-10-05
Author(s): Marcella Hastings, Nadia Heninger, Eric Wustrow

Link to Paper


Abstract
We propose a proof of work protocol that computes the discrete logarithm of an element in a cyclic group. Individual provers generating proofs of work perform a distributed version of the Pollard rho algorithm. Such a protocol could capture the computational power expended to construct proof-of-work-based blockchains for a more useful purpose, as well as incentivize advances in hardware, software, or algorithms for an important cryptographic problem. We describe our proposed construction and elaborate on challenges and potential trade-offs that arise in designing a practical proof of work.

References
  1. SpaceMint: A cryptocurrency based on proofs of space. In: FC’18. Springer (2018)
  2. Back, A.: Hashcash-a denial of service counter-measure (2002)
  3. Ball, M., Rosen, A., Sabin, M., Vasudevan, P.N.: Proofs of work from worst-case assumptions. In: CRYPTO 2018. Springer International Publishing (2018)
  4. Barbulescu, R., Gaudry, P., Joux, A., Thom´e, E.: A heuristic quasi-polynomial algorithm for discrete logarithm in finite fields of small characteristic. In: EUROCRYPT’14 (2014)
  5. Barker, E., Chen, L., Roginsky, A., Vassilev, A., Davis, R.: SP 800-56A Revision 3. Recommendation for pair-wise key establishment schemes using discrete logarithm cryptography. National Institute of Standards & Technology (2018)
  6. Biryukov, A., Pustogarov, I.: Proof-of-work as anonymous micropayment: Rewarding a Tor relay. In: FC’15. Springer (2015)
  7. Bitansky, N., Canetti, R., Chiesa, A., Goldwasser, S., Lin, H., Rubinstein, A., Tromer, E.: The hunting of the SNARK. Journal of Cryptology 30(4) (2017)
  8. Bloom, B.H.: Space/time trade-offs in hash coding with allowable errors. Commun. ACM 13(7), 422–426 (Jul 1970). https://doi.org/10.1145/362686.362692
  9. Boneh, D., Bonneau, J., B¨unz, B., Fisch, B.: Verifiable delay functions. In: Annual International Cryptology Conference. pp. 757–788. Springer (2018)
  10. Bos, J.W., Kaihara, M.E., Kleinjung, T., Lenstra, A.K., Montgomery, P.L.: Solving a 112-bit prime elliptic curve discrete logarithm problem on game consoles using sloppy reduction. International Journal of Applied Cryptography 2(3) (2012)
  11. Buterin, V.: Uncle rate and transaction fee analysis, https://blog.ethereum.org/2016/10/31/uncle-rate-transaction-fee-analysis/
  12. Certicom ECC challenge (1997), http://certicom.com/images/pdfs/challenge-2009.pdf, Updated 10 Nov 2009. Accessed via Web Archive
  13. Diffie, W., Hellman, M.: New directions in cryptography. IEEE transactions on Information Theory 22(6), 644–654 (1976)
  14. Dwork, C., Naor, M.: Pricing via processing or combatting junk mail. In: Annual International Cryptology Conference. pp. 139–147. Springer (1992)
  15. Ethereum Project: Ethereum white paper, https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/White-Paper\#modified-ghost-implementation
  16. Gordon, D.M.: Discrete logarithms in GF(P) using the number field sieve. SIAM J. Discret. Math. 6(1), 124–138 (Feb 1993). https://doi.org/10.1137/0406010
  17. Jakobsson, M., Juels, A.: Proofs of work and bread pudding protocols. In: Secure Information Networks, pp. 258–272. Springer (1999)
  18. King, S.: Primecoin: Cryptocurrency with prime number proof-of-work (2013)
  19. Kleinjung, T., Diem, C., Lenstra, A.K., Priplata, C., Stahlke, C.: Computation of a 768-bit prime field discrete logarithm. In: EUROCRYPT’17. Springer (2017)
  20. Lepinski, M., Kent, S.: Additional Diffie-Hellman groups for use with IETF standards. RFC 5114, RFC Editor (2008), http://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc5114.txt
  21. Lochter, M.: Blockchain as cryptanalytic tool. Cryptology ePrint Archive, Report 2018/893 (2018), https://eprint.iacr.org/2018/893.pdf
  22. Miller, A., Juels, A., Shi, E., Parno, B., Katz, J.: Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin work for data preservation. In: 2014 IEEE S&P. pp. 475–490. IEEE (2014)
  23. Nakamoto, S.: Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. White paper (2008)
  24. National Institute of Standards and Technology: FIPS PUB 186-4: Digital Signature Standard (DSS). National Institute of Standards and Technology (Jul 2013)
  25. Percival, C., Josefsson, S.: The scrypt password-based key derivation function. RFC 7914, RFC Editor (Aug 2016), http://rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc7914.txt
  26. Pollard, J.M.: Monte carlo methods for index computation (mod p). In: Mathematics of Computation. vol. 32 (1978)
  27. Poon, J., Buterin, V.: Plasma: Scalable autonomous smart contracts (2017)
  28. Shanks, D.: Class number, a theory of factorization, and genera. In: Proc. of Symp. Math. Soc., 1971. vol. 20, pp. 41–440 (1971)
  29. Sompolinsky, Y., Zohar, A.: Secure high-rate transaction processing in Bitcoin. In: FC’15. pp. 507–527. Springer (2015)
  30. Teske, E.: Speeding up Pollard’s rho method for computing discrete logarithms. In: ANTS-III. pp. 541–554. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg (1998)
  31. Valenta, L., Adrian, D., Sanso, A., Cohney, S., Fried, J., Hastings, M., Halderman, J.A., Heninger, N.: Measuring small subgroup attacks against Diffie-Hellman. In: NDSS (2017)
  32. Valenta, L., Sullivan, N., Sanso, A., Heninger, N.: In search of CurveSwap: Measuring elliptic curve implementations in the wild. In: EuroS&P. IEEE (2018)
  33. Van Oorschot, P.C., Wiener, M.J.: Parallel collision search with cryptanalytic applications. Journal of cryptology 12(1), 1–28 (1999)
  34. de Vries, A.: Bitcoin’s growing energy problem. Joule 2(5), 801–805 (2018)
  35. Wenger, E., Wolfger, P.: Harder, better, faster, stronger: elliptic curve discrete logarithm computations on FPGAs. Journal of Cryptographic Engineering (2016)
  36. Wiener, M.J., Zuccherato, R.J.: Faster attacks on elliptic curve cryptosystems. In: International workshop on selected areas in cryptography. Springer (1998)
  37. Wustrow, E., VanderSloot, B.: DDoSCoin: Cryptocurrency with a malicious proofof-work. In: WOOT (2016)
submitted by dj-gutz to myrXiv [link] [comments]

Nonce – Definition, Meaning, Review, Description, Example, Proof-Of-Work Bitcoin Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation Get free 50 EQVC Tokens by joining Big Airdrop - total supply 2M Ganesh Rao : 6 Money Lessons by Robert Kiyosaki - YouTube Advocate of Sustainable Fashion  Lever Style

Request PDF Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation Bit coin is widely regarded as the first broadly successful e-cash system. An oft-cited concern, though, is that mining ... Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation Andrew Miller1 , Ari Juels2 , Elaine Shi1 , Bryan Parno3 and Jonathan Katz1 1. University of Maryland Cornell Tech (Jacobs) 3 Microsoft ... Title: Permacoin repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation, Author: Richard Kastelein, Name: Permacoin repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation, Length: 17 pages, Page: 8, Published ... permacoin repurposing bitcoin work for data preservation - Request PDF Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation Bit coin is widely regarded as the first broadly successful e-cash system. An oft-cited concern, though, is that mining ... - Home Browse by Title Proceedings SP '14 Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation. Permacoin: Repurposing Bitcoin Work for Data Preservation Andrew Miller1, Ari Juels, Elaine Shi1, Bryan Parno2 and Jonathan Katz1 1University of Maryland 2Microsoft Research Abstract Bitcoin is widely regarded as the first broadly successful e-cash system. An oft-cited concern, though, is that mining Bitcoins wastes computational resources. Indeed, Bitcoin’s underlying mining mechanism ...

[index] [15176] [33968] [40113] [23269] [32594] [27748] [24515] [28402] [8727] [41752]

Nonce – Definition, Meaning, Review, Description, Example, Proof-Of-Work Bitcoin

In innovation & process aspect, we focus on green energy & water preservation. Our factories are working toward for renewable green energy that will supplement the main electric grid for reducing ... In Bitcoin's mining process, the goal is to find a hash below a target number which is calculated based on the difficulty. Proof-of-work in Bitcoin's mining takes an input consists of Merkle Root ... Andrew Miller speaks on Permacoin, a new security technique for cryptocurrencies that allows distributed storage of petabytes of data. Silicon Valley Ethereu... Please contact the person who sent you this video/audio to start the joining process in MMMBSC… Visit for Hindi Videos about MMMBSC… https://frontfootlife.bl... Close. This video is unavailable.

#