Consensus Without Identity: Using A Block Chain: Bitcoin's Consensus Algorithm

Consensus without identity: using a block chain
Bitcoin’s consensus algorithm

Nodes and identities
Nodes without persistent identity
• We will have to keep in mind that Bitcoin nodes don't have any persistent
long term identities. This is another difference from how traditional
distributive consensus algorithms operate. If nodes had identities, it would
make things a lot easier:
• it would be possible to include in the protocol specific references to nodes IDs.
• the system would be more secure. If nodes were identified and weren't able to create
new identities, we could make assumption on malicious nodes and try to eliminate
them from the network.
Why Bitcoin nodes don't have identities?
• Bitcoin protocol is a peer-to-peer decentralized system. So there is no central
authority that assigns identities to nodes and verify that they're not creating new
nodes. This could take to a Sybils attack: malicious nodes could create a lot of
copies of nodes all controlled by them to look like there are a lot of different
participants. When in fact, all those pseudo participants are really controlled by
the same adversary.
• Pseudo-anonimity is a goal of Bitcoin, so it doesn't assign an immutable identity
even if it could be possible also in a decentralized system. Bitcoin doesn't provide
a strong anonymity, since different transactions of the same subject can probably
be linked together. But, at the same time, it is not necessary to use a real identity
to take part to the network. So an adversary could trace the transactions and
connect them to an "address", but it would be harder to understand who is really
making that transactions.
Ability to check a random node
• Even if the Bitcoin nodes don't have an immutable identity we can make one
assumption. We can suppose to have the ability to pick a random node and
check it. It is similar to systems such as lotteries where people are tracked and
verified not through their real identity, but through a ticket or a token assigned
to them to take part in the game.
• For the moment we will assume that there's a similar token generation and
distribution also in Bitcoin protocol. This protocol will assure that if an
adversary tries to create a lot of sibil nodes, all of them will just get one token.
So the adversary is not able to multiply his power that way.
Implicit consensus
• Under the assumption of random node selection, it is possible to reach implicit
consensus. Let's identify a round as the insertion of a new block in the
blockchain. In each round a random node is somehow selected, and this node
will be able to propose the next block in to be inserted in the blockchain.
• There is no consensus algorithm and no voting. This node simply unilaterally
proposes what the next block in the block chain is going to be. If the node is a
malicious one, other nodes will implicitly accept its block or reject it. The
acceptance is implicit because:
• if other nodes consider the new block valid, they will extend the blockchain starting from
this block
• while if other nodes want to reject the new block, they will continue the blockchain
starting from the previous one
Why the consensus algorithm works?
Let's see how can a malicious adversary try to subvert this process. If Alice is a
malicious attacker, she could try to:
• steal Bitcoins belonging to another user. She is not able to do this, because
she cannot forge someone else's signature.
• act against another user Bob. For example Alice could try not to insert any
Bob's transactions into new blocks. But there will be other honest nodes that
will gather Bob's transaction into a new block.
• try to spend some coins twice (double-spending attack).
What can a malicious node do?
Double-
signed by A spending
CA → B
Pay to pkB : H( ) attack
signed by A CA → A’
Pay to pkA’ : H( )
Honest nodes will extend the longest valid branch

In practice nodes extend the block that they first detect on the peer-to-peer network
(not a solid rule)
From Bob the merchant’s point of view
1 confirmation 3 confirmations
CA → B
Double-spend probability
CA → A’ double-spend decreases exponentially
attempt with # of confirmations
Hear about CA → B transaction Most common heuristic:

0 confirmations 6 confirmations
Recap
• Protection against invalid transactions is cryptographic,

but enforced by consensus
• Protection against double-spending is purely by consensus
• You’re never 100% sure a transaction is in consensus branch.

Guarantee is probabilistic
Incentives and proof of work
• Can we penalize, somehow, the node that created the block with the
double‐spend transaction?
Assumption of honesty is problematic
Can we give nodes incentives for behaving honestly?
Can we reward nodes
that created these blocks?
Can we penalize the node

that created this block?
Everything so far is just a distributed consensus protocol

But now we utilize the fact that the currency has value
Incentive 1: Block Reward
Creator of block gets to
• include special coin-creation transaction in the block
• choose recipient address of this transaction
Value is fixed: currently 12.5 BTC, halves every 210,000 blocks created (or
every 4 years at the current rate of block creation)
• We are now in the third period – first period block reward was 50 BTC
Block creator gets to “collect” the reward only if the block ends up on long-
term consensus branch!
• Subtle but powerful trick: Incentivizes nodes to behave in way that will get other
nodes to extend their block
There’s a finite supply of bitcoins
Total supply: 21 million
Block reward is how

Total bitcoins in circulation
new bitcoins are created

First inflection point:
reward halved from 50BTC to 25BTC Runs out in 2040. No new bitcoins
unless rules change
Does that mean that after 2040,

nodes will no longer have incentive
Year to behave honestly?
Not really!
Incentive 2: Transaction Fees
• Creator of transaction can choose to make output
value less than input value
• Remainder is a transaction fee and goes to block

creator (that first puts that transaction into that block)
• Purely voluntary, like a tip

• But system will evolve, and will become mandatory, as Block
rewards run out

Consensus Without Identity: Using A Block Chain: Bitcoin's Consensus Algorithm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consensus Without Identity: Using A Block Chain: Bitcoin's Consensus Algorithm

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consensus Without Identity: Using A Block Chain: Bitcoin's Consensus Algorithm

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Consensus without identity: using a block chain

Bitcoin’s consensus algorithm

Honest nodes will extend the longest valid branch

Hear about CA → B transaction Most common heuristic:

• Protection against invalid transactions is cryptographic,

• Protection against double-spending is purely by consensus

• You’re never 100% sure a transaction is in consensus branch.

Can we penalize the node

Everything so far is just a distributed consensus protocol

Block reward is how

new bitcoins are created

Does that mean that after 2040,

• Remainder is a transaction fee and goes to block

• Purely voluntary, like a tip

You might also like