Proof-of-Stake systems randomly choose, on each round, one of the participants as a consensus leader that extends the chain with the next block such that the selection probability is proportional to the owned stake. However, distributed random number generation is notoriously difficult. Systems that derive randomness from the previous blocks are completely insecure; solutions that provide secure random selection are inefficient due to their high communication complexity; and approaches that balance security and performance exhibit selection bias. When block creation is rewarded with new stake, even a minor bias can have a severe cumulative effect. In this paper, we propose Robust Round Robin, a new consensus scheme that addresses this selection problem. We create reliable long-term identities by bootstrapping from an existing infrastructure, such as Intel's SGX processors, or by mining them starting from an initial fair distribution. For leader selection we use a deterministic approach. On each round, we select a set of the previously created identities as consensus leader candidates in round robin manner. Because simple round-robin alone is vulnerable to attacks and offers poor liveness, we complement such deterministic selection policy with a lightweight endorsement mechanism that is an interactive protocol between the leader candidates and a small subset of other system participants. Our solution has low good efficiency as it requires no expensive distributed randomness generation and it provides block creation fairness which is crucial in deployments that reward it with new stake.
In we outlined the limitations of several related solutions. In this section we review additional related work. For a general comparison and classification of blockchain consensus, we refer the reader to @cite_5 .
@cite_5
2926987861 2767855054 2952115223 2897676665
Since the inception of Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies and the underlying blockchain technology have attracted an increasing interest from both academia and industry. Among various core components, consensus protocol is the defining technology behind the security and performance of blockchain. From incremental modifications of Nakamoto consensus protocol to innovative alternative consensus mechanisms, many consensus protocols have been proposed to improve the performance of the blockchain network itself or to accommodate other specific application needs. In this survey, we present a comprehensive review and analysis on the state-of-the-art blockchain consensus protocols. To facilitate the discussion of our analysis, we first introduce the key definitions and relevant results in the classic theory of fault tolerance which helps to lay the foundation for further discussion. We identify five core components in a blockchain, namely, block proposal, block validation, information propagation, block finalization, and incentive mechanism. Various blockchain consensus protocols are then compared and analyzed using the five-component analysis framework. These analyses provide us new insights in the fundamental differences of various proposals in terms of their suitable application scenarios (i.e. key assumptions), expected fault tolerance, scalability, and drawbacks. We believe this survey will provide blockchain developers and researchers a comprehensive view on the state-of-the-art consensus protocols and facilitate the process of designing future protocols. The blockchain initially gained traction in 2008 as the technology underlying bitcoin, but now has been employed in a diverse range of applications and created a global market worth over $150B as of 2017. What distinguishes blockchains from traditional distributed databases is the ability to operate in a decentralized setting without relying on a trusted third party. As such their core technical component is consensus: how to reach agreement among a group of nodes. This has been extensively studied already in the distributed systems community for closed systems, but its application to open blockchains has revitalized the field and led to a plethora of new designs. The inherent complexity of consensus protocols and their rapid and dramatic evolution makes it hard to contextualize the design landscape. We address this challenge by conducting a systematic and comprehensive study of blockchain consensus protocols. After first discussing key themes in classical consensus protocols, we describe: first protocols based on proof-of-work (PoW), second proof-of-X (PoX) protocols that replace PoW with more energy-efficient alternatives, and third hybrid protocols that are compositions or variations of classical consensus protocols. We develop a framework to evaluate their performance, security and design properties, and use it to systematize key themes in the protocol categories described above. This evaluation leads us to identify research gaps and challenges for the community to consider in future research endeavours. Abstract Cryptographic assets such as Bitcoin and Ethereum provide distributed consensus with a Proof-of-Work protocol and incentive-based engineering. The consensus is inherently dependent on the value of the asset due to the incentives. The value of these assets frequently fluctuates, which in turn influences the incentive component of the consensus mechanism. For a proof-of-work consensus to be secure, the participation reward must have a perceived real-world value. The future of this perception is not at all clear. The recent 70 drop in the value of Bitcoin versus the US Dollar may be precipitating a circle of declining security of the platform which we explore in depth in this paper. In this paper, we analyze the impact of fluctuations on the security of Bitcoin now, and in the future. We introduce a novel method to examine the rationale of a miner based on the price fluctuations. We integrate our method with an existing security evaluation framework and simulator. Using our approach, we determine and report on the impact of the value of the cryptographic asset on the security of the blockchain given the miner’s rationale. Our method allows us to evaluate the impact of different methods of incentive manipulation such as reduced block-reward and transaction fees, by simulation. A major approach to overcoming the performance and scalability limitations of current blockchain protocols is to use sharding which is to split the overheads of processing transactions among multiple, smaller groups of nodes. These groups work in parallel to maximize performance while requiring significantly smaller communication, computation, and storage per node, allowing the system to scale to large networks. However, existing sharding-based blockchain protocols still require a linear amount of communication (in the number of participants) per transaction, and hence, attain only partially the potential benefits of sharding. We show that this introduces a major bottleneck to the throughput and latency of these protocols. Aside from the limited scalability, these protocols achieve weak security guarantees due to either a small fault resiliency (e.g., 1 8 and 1 4) or high failure probability, or they rely on strong assumptions (e.g., trusted setup) that limit their applicability to mainstream payment systems. We propose RapidChain, the first sharding-based public blockchain protocol that is resilient to Byzantine faults from up to a 1 3 fraction of its participants, and achieves complete sharding of the communication, computation, and storage overhead of processing transactions without assuming any trusted setup. RapidChain employs an optimal intra-committee consensus algorithm that can achieve very high throughputs via block pipelining, a novel gossiping protocol for large blocks, and a provably-secure reconfiguration mechanism to ensure robustness. Using an efficient cross-shard transaction verification technique, our protocol avoids gossiping transactions to the entire network. Our empirical evaluations suggest that RapidChain can process (and confirm) more than 7,300 tx sec with an expected confirmation latency of roughly 8.7 seconds in a network of 4,000 nodes with an overwhelming time-to-failure of more than 4,500 years.