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.
Proof of Luck (PoL) @cite_14 is SGX-based solution that has the same basic idea and the same main limitations as PoET (recall ).
@cite_14
1984976620
An interactive proof system is a method by which one party of unlimited resources, called the prover, can convince a party of limited resources, call the verifier, of the truth of a proposition. The verifier may toss coins, ask repeated questions of the prover, and run efficient tests upon the prover's responses before deciding whether to be convinced. This extends the familiar proof system implicit in the notion of NP in that there the verifier may not toss coins or speak, but only listen and verify. Interactive proof systems may not yield proof in the strict mathematical sense: the "proofs" are probabilistic with an exponentially small, though non-zero chance of error. We consider two notions of interactive proof system. One, defined by Goldwasser, Micali, and Rackoff [GMR] permits the verifier a coin that can be tossed in private, i.e., a secret source of randomness. The Permission to copy without ice all or part of this material is granted provided that the copies are not made or distributed for direct commercial advantage, the ACM copyright notice and the title of the publication and its date appear, and notice is given that copying is by permission of the Association for Computing Machinery. To copy otherwise, or to republish, requires a fee and or specific permission. © 1986 ACM 0-89791-193-8 86 0500 0059 $00.75 second, due to Babai, [B] requires that the outcome of the verifier's coin tosses be public and thus accessible to the prover. Our main result is that these two systems are equivalent in power with respect to language recognition. The notion of interactive proof system may be seen to yield a probabilistic analog to NP much as BPP is the probabilistic analog to P. We define the probabilistic, nondeterministic, polynomial time Turing machine and show that it is also equivalent in power to these systems.