Nakamoto Consensus from Multiple Resources
August 02, 2025 Β· Declared Dead Β· π IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive
"No code URL or promise found in abstract"
Evidence collected by the PWNC Scanner
Authors
Mirza Ahad Baig, Christoph U. GΓΌnther, Krzysztof Pietrzak
arXiv ID
2508.01448
Category
cs.CR: Cryptography & Security
Cross-listed
cs.DC
Citations
0
Venue
IACR Cryptology ePrint Archive
Last Checked
4 months ago
Abstract
The blocks in the Bitcoin blockchain record the amount of work W that went into creating them through proofs of work. When honest parties control a majority of the work, consensus is achieved by picking the chain with the highest recorded weight. Resources other than work have been considered to secure such longest-chain blockchains. In Chia, blocks record the amount of space S (via a proof of space) and sequential computational steps V (via a VDF). In this paper, we ask what weight functions Ξ(S,V,W) (that assign a weight to a block as a function of the recorded space, speed, and work) are secure in the sense that whenever the weight of the resources controlled by honest parties is larger than the weight of adversarial parties, the blockchain is secure against private double-spending attacks. We completely classify such functions in an idealized "continuous" model: Ξ(S,V,W) is secure against private double-spending attacks if and only if it is homogeneous of degree one in the timed resources V and W, i.e., Ξ±Ξ(S,V,W)=Ξ(S,Ξ±V, Ξ±W). This includes Bitcoin rule Ξ(S,V,W)=W and Chia rule Ξ(S,V,W) = SV. In a more realistic model where blocks are created at discrete time-points, one additionally needs some mild assumptions on the dependency on S (basically, the weight should not grow too much if S is slightly increased, say linear as in Chia). Our classification is more general and allows various instantiations of the same resource. It provides a powerful tool for designing new longest-chain blockchains. E.g., consider combining different PoWs to counter centralization, say the Bitcoin PoW W_1 and a memory-hard PoW W_2. Previous work suggested to use W_1+W_2 as weight. Our results show that using {\sqrt}(W_1){\cdot}{\sqrt}(W_2), {\min}{W_1,W_2} are also secure, and we argue that in practice these are much better choices.
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