Reducing Forks in the Blockchain via Probabilistic Verification

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Design of a reliable communication system for grid-style traffic light networks Junghoon Lee Dept. of Computer science and statistics Jeju National University.
Advertisements

Advisor : Prof. Yu-Chee Tseng Student : Yi-Chen Lu 12009/06/26.
Modeling Malware Spreading Dynamics Michele Garetto (Politecnico di Torino – Italy) Weibo Gong (University of Massachusetts – Amherst – MA) Don Towsley.
Improving TCP Performance over Mobile Ad Hoc Networks by Exploiting Cross- Layer Information Awareness Xin Yu Department Of Computer Science New York University,
Packet Leashes: Defense Against Wormhole Attacks Authors: Yih-Chun Hu (CMU), Adrian Perrig (CMU), David Johnson (Rice)
Farnoush Banaei-Kashani and Cyrus Shahabi Criticality-based Analysis and Design of Unstructured P2P Networks as “ Complex Systems ” Mohammad Al-Rifai.
An Analysis of the Optimum Node Density for Ad hoc Mobile Networks Elizabeth M. Royer, P. Michael Melliar-Smith and Louise E. Moser Presented by Aki Happonen.
H-SPREAD: A Hybrid Multipath Scheme for Secure and Reliable Data Collection in Wireless Sensor Networks Wenjing Lou, Member, IEEE, and Younggoo Kwon.
Digital Voice Communication Link EE 413 – TEAM 2 April 21 st, 2005.
presented by Hasan SÖZER1 Scalable P2P Search Daniel A. Menascé George Mason University.
Component-Based Routing for Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Chunyue Liu, Tarek Saadawi & Myung Lee CUNY, City College.
Enhancing TCP Fairness in Ad Hoc Wireless Networks Using Neighborhood RED Kaixin Xu, Mario Gerla University of California, Los Angeles {xkx,
Network Coding vs. Erasure Coding: Reliable Multicast in MANETs Atsushi Fujimura*, Soon Y. Oh, and Mario Gerla *NEC Corporation University of California,
International Technology Alliance In Network & Information Sciences International Technology Alliance In Network & Information Sciences 1 Cooperative Wireless.
RTS/CTS-Induced Congestion in Ad Hoc Wireless LANs Saikat Ray, Jeffrey B. Carruthers, and David Starobinski Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
Secure Cell Relay Routing Protocol for Sensor Networks Xiaojiang Du, Fengiing Lin Department of Computer Science North Dakota State University 24th IEEE.
Presented by Fei Huang Virginia Tech April 4, 2007.
Hao Yang, Fan Ye, Yuan Yuan, Songwu Lu, William Arbaugh (UCLA, IBM, U. Maryland) MobiHoc 2005 Toward Resilient Security in Wireless Sensor Networks.
ENERGY-EFFICIENT FORWARDING STRATEGIES FOR GEOGRAPHIC ROUTING in LOSSY WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS Presented by Prasad D. Karnik.
Authors: Yih-Chun Hu, Adrian Perrig, David B. Johnson
Chapter 5 Parameter estimation. What is sample inference? Distinguish between managerial & financial accounting. Understand how managers can use accounting.
Robustness of complex networks with the local protection strategy against cascading failures Jianwei Wang Adviser: Frank,Yeong-Sung Lin Present by Wayne.
a/b/g Networks Routing Herbert Rubens Slides taken from UIUC Wireless Networking Group.
A Framework for Reliable Routing in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Zhenqiang Ye Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy Satish K. Tripathi.
Mix networks with restricted routes PET 2003 Mix Networks with Restricted Routes George Danezis University of Cambridge Computer Laboratory Privacy Enhancing.
Toward a New ATM Software Safety Assessment Methodology dott. Francesca Matarese.
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing Lecture 10 Wenbing Zhao Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering Cleveland State University
TBAS: Enhancing Wi-Fi Authentication by Actively Eliciting Channel State Information Muye Liu, Avishek Mukherjee, Zhenghao Zhang, and Xiuwen Liu Florida.
Mingze Zhang, Mun Choon Chan and A. L. Ananda School of Computing
IMPROVING OF WIRELESS MESH NETWORKS.
Tian Xia and Donghui Zhang Northeastern University
Chapter 6 Inferences Based on a Single Sample: Estimation with Confidence Intervals Slides for Optional Sections Section 7.5 Finite Population Correction.
Fundamentals of Cellular Networks (Part IV)
Group Multicast Capacity in Large Scale Wireless Networks
Evaluation Forms for Blockchain- Based System ver. 1.0
Packet Leashes: Defense Against Wormhole Attacks
Bitcoin - a distributed virtual currency system
Data Communication Networks
CIS 321 Data Communications & Networking
Forwarding and Routing IP Packets
A Straightforward Path Routing in Wireless Ad Hoc Sensor Networks
Switching Techniques In large networks there might be multiple paths linking sender and receiver. Information may be switched as it travels through various.
任課教授:陳朝鈞 教授 學生:王志嘉、馬敏修
En Wang 1,2 , Yongjian Yang 1 , and Jie Wu 2
A stability-oriented approach to improving BGP convergence
A New Multipath Routing Protocol for Ad Hoc Wireless Networks
Risk Management with Minimum Weight
Switching Techniques In large networks there might be multiple paths linking sender and receiver. Information may be switched as it travels through various.
Presented by Hermes Y.H. Liu
High Throughput Route Selection in Multi-Rate Ad Hoc Wireless Networks
Robustness of wireless ad hoc network topologies
Data Communications and Networking
Robustness of wireless ad hoc network topologies
IT351: Mobile & Wireless Computing
Submission Title: [Reliable Multicast for PAC]
Switching Techniques.
Chapter 4 Data Link Layer.
Ethernet – CSMA/CD Review
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
Reducing Total Network Power Consumption
Maximizing MAC Throughputs by Dynamic RTS-CTS Threshold
INTERCONNECTED SYSTEM GENERATING CAPACITY RELIABILITY EVALUATION
Kai Bu 04 Blockchain Kai Bu
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
EEC 688/788 Secure and Dependable Computing
Faculty Seminar Series Blockchain Technology
Objectives 6.1 Estimating with confidence Statistical confidence
Objectives 6.1 Estimating with confidence Statistical confidence
COMPUTER SCIENCE SEMINAR. INTRODUCTION WHAT IS BlOCKCHAIN?? A digital ledger in which transaction made are chronologically recorded without inclusion.
Exploring Energy-Latency Tradeoffs for Sensor Network Broadcasts
Presentation transcript:

Reducing Forks in the Blockchain via Probabilistic Verification Bing Liu, Yang Qin and Xiaowen Chu Harbin Institute Technology(Shenzhen)&Hong Kong Baptist University liubing@stu.hit.edu.cn April 8, 2019

Outline 1. Motivation 2. Block Propagation Delay The generation of forks The harm of forks 2. Block Propagation Delay 3. Probabilistic Verification PvScheme Enhanced PvScheme Security Analysis 4. Experiments and Results 5. Conclusion

Fig.1 Forks in blockchain 1.Motivation The generation of forks The blockchain forks are mainly caused by the block propagation delay in the network. To some degree, it can reduce forks if we can reduce block propagation delay. But what if B31 travels faster, and reaches M6 before B32 is created? Fig.1 Forks in blockchain

1.Motivation The harm of forks (1) The emergence of fork wastes the computing power of the network. (2)The fork weakens the security of blockchain, and increases the risk of attacks and double-spending. (3) The computing capacity of network is actually split, which will directly reduce the production rate of blocks and affect the system’s performance. (4) The fork will delay the time the transaction is confirmed.

2.Block Propagation Delay The propagation delay is the combination of transmission time and the time of local verification of the block. The verification time is the major contributor to the propagation delay. The improvement of the verification time will greatly improve the efficiency for peers to receive blocks, which will reduce the blockchain forks in some degree. Fig. 2 The process of block propagation

3.Probabilistic Verification PvScheme: In probabilistic verification, a node does not need to verify each block it has received, but selectively verifies blocks based on a probability. Validation degree υ: the average block verification ratio of nodes in blockchain. E.g. when the validation degree is 0.5, a block is verified every two nodes on average across the network. When the validation degree is 1, the node needs to verify each block, which is the standard protocol implemented now.

3.Probabilistic Verification PvScheme If the probability ε meets the validation degree υ, the block does not need to be verified and is accepted directly. Otherwise, the block needs to be verified. verification flag Fig. 3. The process of probabilistic verification

3.Probabilistic Verification Enhanced PvScheme (1)Feedback and rebroadcast Cause : When the validation degree is not 1, blocks are not strictly verified by nodes. There may be some fake blocks that have accepted by some nodes. Purpose: To ensure a reliable block delivery

3.Probabilistic Verification Feedback and rebroadcast design When a node verifies a block and finds an error, it continues to feedback until it finds a node with the validated block, and requires the node to rebroadcast the block. verification flag Fig. 4. The process of feedback and rebroadcast

3.Probabilistic Verification Enhanced PvScheme (2) Threshold Cause: In the worst case, all nodes may accept a block without verification. To avoid the worst case, we set threshold value θ≤3, which means three consecutive nodes at most are allowed to accept the block without verification. Purpose: a. In order to detect fake blocks as quickly as possible. b. If there is an error, the block can be retransmitted in a shorter path.

3.Probabilistic Verification Security Analysis Fake blocks (1) In the standard protocol, the propagation delay Tsta is the combination of the transmission time tm and verification time tv. Tnew : the propagation delay in the PvScheme. Tsta : the propagation delay in the standard protocol. p: the probability of a block error at the validation degree υ. transmission time tm, verification time tv, the feedback time tf at a hop, and tv >>tm>>tf 1/υ : the average feedback path length at the validation degree υ (2)In PvScheme, the feedback time and rebroadcast time should also be included.

3.Probabilistic Verification Security Analysis Fake blocks Solution: our scheme costs less propagation delay than the standard protocol if less than 50% error blocks occurs in the validation degree of 0.5, or less than 10% error blocks occurs in the validation degree of 0.9. We would like to know the range of p, which makes the propagation delay of PvScheme is still less than the delay of the standard protocol. Make Tnew =Tsta, and we get: When υ=0.5,we get p=0.5, and υ=0.9, we get p=0.1 . That is: When υ=0.9, if p<0.1, Tnew < Tsta When υ=0.9, if p>0.1, Tnew > Tsta

4.Experiments and Results PvScheme Definition validation degree υ the average block verification ratio of nodes in blockchain synchronization time τ the delay required for all nodes to fully accept blocks in the network stale block rate rs the ratio of stale blocks to total blocks over a given period of time - It measures how many forks there are. security index ς the level of safety in which blocks are not tampered with at the current validation degree security assessment rate ρ a joint analysis of the block security and performance at various validation degrees,

4.Experiments and Results PvScheme: We want to get a lower stale block rate as safely as possible. The security assessment rate ρ is expressed as In theory, the greater the validation degree υ, the more nodes need to verify the block. Therefore, it costs more block propagation delays, resulting in a larger synchronization time τ and stale block rate rs. In practice, we need a smaller synchronization time τ and stale block rate rs, as well as a larger security index ς. Therefore, we ask for a smaller ρ in this formula.

4.Experiemnts and Results In order to consider the tradeoff between security and performance in blockchain, we set the validation degree υ from 0.5 to 1 in our experiments.

4.Experiemnts and Results In this experiment, 1000 blocks were designed to be broadcast between 6000 nodes. In Figure 5 and Figure 6, as validation degree increases, so does the synchronization time and the stale block rate, which is consistent with our previous theoretical analysis. By contrast, after enhancing PvScheme security, PvScheme has higher synchronization time and stale block rate than before. Since the security design increases the delay of the system. Fig. 5. Synchronization time under various validation degrees Fig. 6.Stale block rate under various validation degrees

4.Experiemnts and Results Figure 7 shows the propagation delay of blocks received by different proportions of nodes in the network at various validation degrees. The block propagation delay increases with the increase of the validation degree. It is still in accordance with our analysis. More propagation delay occurs because more nodes verify the block.

4.Experiemnts and Results We also have captured the longest continuous forks at various validation degrees. As validation degree increases, in addition to the validation degree of 0.9, the longest forks also show an increasing trend. It means PvScheme can indeed reduce the number of continuous forks. The generation of fork is inherently random, so the data in the validation degree of 0.9 is normal.

4.Experiemnts and Results Here, we get experimental results under various validation degrees. In TABLE II, it meets the requirements when the validation degree υ =0.9. Solution: we can use the validation degree of 0.9, that is, 9 verifications out of 10 nodes to replace the standard protocol. Based on the above theoretical analysis, we need to find the minimum security assessment rate ρ.

5.Conclusion According to our experimental simulations, we get the best effect when the validation degree is 0.9. It gets a relatively low fork and a relatively high level of security at the same time, which achieves a compromise between the performance and security in blockchain. In practice, it should be combined with reality to determine the most reasonable value of validation degree. It can be determined that the most reasonable value of validation degree is various for different environments and network structures.

Please email your questions to: liubing@stu.hit.edu.cn Thank You !!