Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3490486.3538337acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesecConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Optimal Strategic Mining Against Cryptographic Self-Selection in Proof-of-Stake

Published: 13 July 2022 Publication History

Abstract

Cryptographic Self-Selection is a subroutine used to select a leader for modern proof-of-stake consensus protocols. In cryptographic self-selection, each round r has a seed Qr. In round r, each account owner is asked to digitally sign Qr, hash their digital signature to produce a credential, and then broadcast this credential to the entire network. A publicly-known function scores each credential in a manner so that the distribution of the lowest scoring credential is identical to the distribution of stake owned by each account. The user who broadcasts the lowest-scoring credential is the leader for round r, and their credential becomes the seed Qr+1. Such protocols leave open the possibility of manipulation: a user who owns multiple accounts that each produce low-scoring credentials in round r can selectively choose which ones to broadcast in order to influence the seed for round r+1. Indeed, the user can pre-compute their credentials for round r+1 for each potential seed, and broadcast only the credential (among those with low enough score to be leader) that produces the most favorable seed.
We consider an adversary who wishes to maximize the expected fraction of rounds in which an account they own is the leader. We show such an adversary always benefits from deviating from the intended protocol, regardless of the fraction of the stake controlled. We characterize the optimal strategy; first by proving the existence of optimal positive recurrent strategies whenever the adversary owns last than 3-5/2 ~38% of the stake. Then, we provide a Markov Decision Process formulation to compute the optimal strategy.

References

[1]
2021. URL https://ccaf.io/cbeci/index. Accessed: 2022--1--10.
[2]
N. Arnosti and S. M. Weinberg. Bitcoin: A natural oligopoly. Management Science, 2022.
[3]
J. Brown-Cohen, A. Narayanan, A. Psomas, and S. M. Weinberg. Formal barriers to longest-chain proof-of-stake protocols. In Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pages 459--473, 2019.
[4]
C. Cachin, K. Kursawe, F. Petzold, and V. Shoup. Secure and efficient asynchronous broadcast protocols. In Annual International Cryptology Conference, pages 524--541. Springer, 2001.
[5]
M. Carlsten, H. Kalodner, S. M. Weinberg, and A. Narayanan. On the instability of bitcoin without the block reward. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pages 154--167, 2016.
[6]
J. Chen and S. Micali. Algorand: A secure and efficient distributed ledger. Theoretical Computer Science, 777: 155--183, 2019.
[7]
I. Eyal and E. G. Sirer. Majority is not enough: Bitcoin mining is vulnerable. In International conference on financial cryptography and data security, pages 436--454. Springer, 2014.
[8]
M. V. Ferreira and S. M. Weinberg. Proof-of-stake mining games with perfect randomness. In Proceedings of the 22nd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation, pages 433--453, 2021.
[9]
M. V. Ferreira, D. J. Moroz, D. C. Parkes, and M. Stern. Dynamic posted-price mechanisms for the blockchain transaction-fee market. In Proceedings of the 3rd ACM Conference on Advances in Financial Technologies, pages 86--99, 2021.
[10]
Y. Gilad, R. Hemo, S. Micali, G. Vlachos, and N. Zeldovich. Algorand: Scaling byzantine agreements for cryptocurrencies. In Proceedings of the 26th symposium on operating systems principles, pages 51--68, 2017.
[11]
K. Karantias, A. Kiayias, and D. Zindros. Proof-of-burn. In International conference on financial cryptography and data security, pages 523--540. Springer, 2020.
[12]
Peralta, and Booth]kelsey2019referenceJ. Kelsey, L. T. Brand ao, R. Peralta, and H. Booth. A reference for randomness beacons: Format and protocol version 2. Technical report, National Institute of Standards and Technology, 2019.
[13]
A. Kiayias, A. Russell, B. David, and R. Oliynykov. Ouroboros: A provably secure proof-of-stake blockchain protocol. In Annual international cryptology conference, pages 357--388. Springer, 2017.
[14]
S. Micali, M. Rabin, and S. Vadhan. Verifiable random functions. In 40th annual symposium on foundations of computer science (cat. No. 99CB37039), pages 120--130. IEEE, 1999.
[15]
S. Nakamoto. Bitcoin: A peer-to-peer electronic cash system. Decentralized Business Review, page 21260, 2008.
[16]
M. O. Rabin. Transaction protection by beacons. Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 27 (2): 256--267, 1983.
[17]
L. Ren and S. Devadas. Proof of space from stacked expanders. In Theory of Cryptography Conference, pages 262--285. Springer, 2016.
[18]
T. Roughgarden. Transaction fee mechanism design. ACM SIGecom Exchanges, 19 (1): 52--55, 2021.
[19]
A. Sapirshtein, Y. Sompolinsky, and A. Zohar. Optimal selfish mining strategies in bitcoin. In International Conference on Financial Cryptography and Data Security, pages 515--532. Springer, 2016.
[20]
H. W. Watson and F. Galton. On the probability of the extinction of families. The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 4: 138--144, 1875.

Cited By

View all

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
EC '22: Proceedings of the 23rd ACM Conference on Economics and Computation
July 2022
1269 pages
ISBN:9781450391504
DOI:10.1145/3490486
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 13 July 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. blockchain
  2. cryptocurrency
  3. leader election
  4. proof-of-stake
  5. strategic mining

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

EC '22
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 664 of 2,389 submissions, 28%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 141
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)32
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)5
Reflects downloads up to 09 Nov 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media