Unsealing the secrets of blockchain consensus: A systematic comparison of the formal security of proof-of-work and proof-of-stake
January 25, 2024 Β· Declared Dead Β· π ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
IvΓ‘n AbellΓ‘n Γlvarez, Vincent Gramlich, Johannes Sedlmeir
arXiv ID
2401.14527
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
cs.DC
Citations
33
Venue
ACM Symposium on Applied Computing
Last Checked
6 months ago
Abstract
With the increasing adoption of decentralized information systems based on a variety of permissionless blockchain networks, the choice of consensus mechanism is at the core of many controversial discussions. Ethereum's recent transition from (PoW) to proof-of-stake (PoS)-based consensus has further fueled the debate on which mechanism is more favorable. While the aspects of energy consumption and degree of (de-)centralization are often emphasized in the public discourse, seminal research has also shed light on the formal security aspects of both approaches individually. However, related work has not yet comprehensively structured the knowledge about the security properties of PoW and PoS. Rather, it has focused on in-depth analyses of specific protocols or high-level comparative reviews covering a broad range of consensus mechanisms. To fill this gap and unravel the commonalities and discrepancies between the formal security properties of PoW- and PoS-based consensus, we conduct a systematic literature review over 26 research articles. Our findings indicate that PoW-based consensus with the longest chain rule provides the strongest formal security guarantees. Nonetheless, PoS can achieve similar guarantees when addressing its more pronounced tradeoff between safety and liveness through hybrid approaches.
Community Contributions
Found the code? Know the venue? Think something is wrong? Let us know!
π Similar Papers
In the same crypt β Cryptography & Security
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
The Limitations of Deep Learning in Adversarial Settings
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Distillation as a Defense to Adversarial Perturbations against Deep Neural Networks
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative Execution
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
How To Backdoor Federated Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Evasion Attacks against Machine Learning at Test Time
Died the same way β π» Ghosted
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
In-Datacenter Performance Analysis of a Tensor Processing Unit
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted
Deep Convolutional Neural Networks for Computer-Aided Detection: CNN Architectures, Dataset Characteristics and Transfer Learning
R.I.P.
π»
Ghosted